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

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

From: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 18:30:29 +0100
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000907182805.00ccca90@pop.dial.pipex.com>
To: Miles Sabin <msabin@cromwellmedia.co.uk>
Cc: xml-uri@w3.org
At 06:05 PM 9/7/00 +0100, Miles Sabin wrote:
>But why should the URI-to-resouce binding be any more constant
>than the resource-to-entity body relationship?

Because that's how RFC 2396 defines it to be.

What I'd like to know is what official/definitive document says whether the 
URI:resource relationship is 1:1 or N:1.   Any offers?

#g


------------
Graham Klyne
(GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2000 13:31:21 GMT

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