Re: Moving on (was Re: URIs quack like a duck)

-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Cc: xml-uri@w3.org <xml-uri@w3.org>
Date: Saturday, June 03, 2000 12:31 AM
Subject: Re: Moving on (was Re: URIs quack like a duck)


>Tim Berners-Lee scripsit:
>
>> That is why relative URIs are excluded.
>> If no relative URIs are used, then red and green algorithms match.
>
>Deprecated is not excluded.  If they are genuinely excluded, then existing
>documents (from Microsoft customers) break. 

The actual example Michael Rys gave was not using a relative URI.

> If they are merely deprecated,
>then the problem still must be solved for Infoset purposes, because even
>deprecated syntax has to have a semantics.
>
>-- 
>John Cowan                                   cowan@ccil.org
> Yes, I know the message date is bogus.  I can't help it.
> --me, on far too many occasions
>

Received on Saturday, 3 June 2000 01:18:58 UTC