W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: XLink 1.1: 5.4 "URI reference" unclear

From: Webb Roberts <webb.roberts@gtri.gatech.edu>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 15:01:03 -0500
Message-ID: <43D7D8FF.80504@gtri.gatech.edu>
To: "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Cc: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>

On 1/25/2006 Grosso, Paul wrote:
> The XML Core WG reconsidered the issue and had consensus to
> stick with the better-known term "relative URI".  

Is there a normative definition available for "relative URI"?  It seems 
that it was defined in RFC 2396, which is explicitly obsoleted by RFC 
3986.  It would seem preferrable to go with the term "relative reference 
to a URI" as defined in RFC 3986.

"Relative URI" may be better-known, but seems to be officially obosolete 
in current specs.  xml:base, for example, uses "relative uri" as defined 
by 2396.  HTML 4 provides its own definition of the term.

Webb

-- 
Webb Roberts (webb.roberts@gtri.gatech.edu)
Research Scientist, Georgia Tech Research Institute
Atlanta, GA  (404)407-6181
Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2006 20:01:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:39:46 GMT