- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 14:00:47 +0100
- To: Ian Davis <lists@internetalchemy.org>
- Cc: public-cwm-talk@w3.org
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 09:16:34 +0100, Ian Davis <lists@internetalchemy.org> wrote: > (moved from redland-dev list. Original post at: > <http://lists.usefulinc.com/pipermail/redland-dev/2004-April/000466.html>) > > On Saturday, April 24, 2004, 11:02:36 PM, Dave Beckett wrote: > > > The relativeUri production: > > http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/2004/01/turtle/#relativeURI > > refers to encoding as in N-Triples 3.3: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-testcases/#sec-uri-encoding > > which encodes an RDF URI reference: > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/#dfn-URI-reference > > Yes, that's what I'd expect, but the text in the grammar says: > "character* with escapes as defined in the N-Triples section 3.3 URI > References. This is then used as a relative URI and resolved against > the current base URI to give an absolute URI reference." > > It doesn't say that that the characters are restricted to those valid > in a URI, just the escapes. .. but it does say it encodes an RDF URI reference, which does have that restriction. > .. I half wondered if you were explicitly > being lenient for future IRI support. Perhaps you could add a sentence > referring to the URI Reference definition in RDF Concepts. That was the intention. But your original question was about > in URIs, and that character is still not allowed in IRIs, at least as far as I recall. Dave
Received on Tuesday, 4 May 2004 09:02:14 UTC