W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-uri@w3.org > September 2000

Re: Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-daigle-uri-std-00.txt

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 23:20:00 -0400
Message-Id: <200009060316.XAA16361@hesketh.net>
To: xml-uri@w3.org
Cc: uri@w3.org
At 11:24 PM 9/5/00 -0400, Al Gilman wrote on xml-uri@w3.org:
>There is a list <uri@w3.org> where these things do get discussed.  While
>the traffic is only sporadic, most of the principal players do try to make
>sure that issues get aired there.  
>
>As you will see, this draft has not gone without comment
><http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/>.

Well, at least it's good to see that URIs as currently defined produce a
similar empty and unsatisfying feeling in some quarters of the RDF
community as well as in some quarters of the XML community.

I'll repeat my suggestion from earlier: either clarify RFC 2396 and give it
some meat - on the difficult questions like what a resource is, what an
identifier is, and how to compare resources and identifiers - or just call
it syntax for identifiers and leave it at that.

I'm happy to see this latest draft as a guide to URIs, but I don't think it
rates status other than informational.

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
XHTML: Migrating Toward XML
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books
Received on Tuesday, 5 September 2000 23:16:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Tuesday, 12 April 2005 12:17:25 GMT