W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2008

Re: rel=CURIE in RDFa, but rel=URI in Link:

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 19:07:52 +0100
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <f5br67qa747.fsf@hildegard.inf.ed.ac.uk>

Hash: SHA1

Dan Connolly writes:

> On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 10:33 -0400, Jonathan Rees wrote:
>> I was under the impression that the founding fathers meant for Link:  
>> and <link> to be compatible. We seem to have lost that possibility  
>> now, due to lack of coordination between groups working independently  
>> on extensions to HTTP and XHTML.
> They're still compatible if you consider both CURIEs and
> URI references as syntactic sugar for URIs.

But URI refs and CURIEs overlap lexically -- how are you supposed to
tell whether mailto:robin is a URI reference or a CURIE?  The TAG is
on record [1] as saying CURIEs should not be deployed in existing
contexts where URIs are currently specified.


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0014.html
- -- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
                         Half-time member of W3C Team
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

Received on Thursday, 11 September 2008 18:08:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:58 UTC