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

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

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 16:20:49 -0500
Message-ID: <48DEA3B1.70906@aptest.com>
To: "Roy T.Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
CC: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>

Roy T.Fielding wrote:
>
> As far as I am concerned, link references in Web architecture consist
> of URIs and relative URIs.  Not CURIEs and not IRIs.  Some data formats
> will have intermediate forms for presentation and ease of data entry, 
> such
> as IRIs or CURIEs, but those forms will not appear in HTTP envelopes
> and header fields because they are neither portable nor understandable
> outside of their own small context.
>
> Under no circumstances does (X)HTML(*) define any aspect of links
> for the World Wide Web other than the format of data entry within their
> own media types.
FWIW I agree with you.  This only came up because the Link: header 
proposal had some short relationship names in it.  If the Link: header 
rel values can have short names, then they should map directly to URIs 
(for sem web purposes). All we were saying is that we have such URIs 
already at http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab# and Link: resolution 
could use those. It could also use others - I don't mind.


-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Saturday, 27 September 2008 21:21:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:06 GMT