W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: Fwd: Re: HRRIs, IRIs, etc

From: Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 11:01:35 +0100 (BST)
To: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Cc: <public-iri@w3.org>, <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>, <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>, <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20070626100135.220B9227966@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk>

> >> You should simply drop this effort and use IRI References instead. There
> >> is a high cost associated with yet another notion of resource identifier
> >> technology

> >This is not another notion of resource identifier.  It is the existing
> >notion used for XML system identifier, XLink href, and several other
> >things.  We are merely providing a name and a single place for a
> >definition that already exists in multiple specs.

> If these things are not resource identifiers, then what are they?

I did not mean that they were not resource identifiers.  It was the
"yet another" part that I was disputing.  They are an *existing* form
of resource identifiers, which does not have an name and whose
definition is currently replicated in several places.

-- Richard
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 10:02:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:26 UTC