- From: Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
- Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:58:49 -0400
- To: "\"Martin J. D?rst\"" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Cc: Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>, Jodi Schneider <jodi.schneider@deri.org>, Andrew Cunningham <andrewc@vicnet.net.au>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@dfki.de>, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>, public-i18n-core@w3.org
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 12:07:00PM +0900, "Martin J. D?rst" wrote: > It's unfortunately somewhat hidden, so you may not be aware of, but > in terms of technology, in particular RDF, what it calls "URIs" are > actually IRIs. Please have a look at > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-Graph-URIref. > > So (very roughly paraphrased), to write something like "Linked Data > uses URIs (ASCII only), but you might also think about supporting > IRIs", would be wrong. It would be better to write something along > the lines ""Linked Data uses URIs. By definition, this includes IRIs > (see Section 6.4 of RDF Concepts)." I like this. The following section is particularly helpful in clarifying the issue. Comments interspersed... > >...or indeed, whether the advocates of IRIs advocate their use in libraries > >regardless of scripts used -- i.e., even for Latin-script URIs? > > I'm not sure I understand your question here. > > If you want to ask whether libraries e.g. in the US should make sure > that the semantic web technology and products they use conforms to > the specifications and does not limit identifiers to US-ASCII only, > then the answer would be clearly YES. > > If your question is whether a library e.g. in the US should use an > URI or an IRI for an identifier such as > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football, the answer is that this is > irrelevant; by definition, all URIs are also IRIs. > > If your question is whether such a library, for such an identifier, > should add non-ASCII characters to make it an IRI but not an URI, Re: "an IRI but not a URI", see my comment below. > e.g. by modifying the above URI/IRI to something like > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fóòtbåll, then the answer is of course > NO. I hope nobody advocates such nonsense. Based on my own misunderstanding of IRIs, that had indeed been my question. > If your question is whether a library e.g. in Germany or France or > Italy, where the languages used are written with the Latin script > including diacritics, should create IRIs that are not URIs as As above, perhaps you mean "IRIs that are not US-ASCII-only URIs", since by definition all IRIs are also URIs, if I correctly understand? > identifiers, then this may depend on various circumstances, i.e. the > availability and familiarity of people with US-ASCII fallbacks,... > As an example, the German Wikipedia has > http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fußball, but this is also available > under http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fussball. > (Please note that I wrote 'create'; for 'use', the answer is > different because identifiers may come from the outside without a > choice.) I think this can be handled without confusing the average reader and will propose a wording. Tom -- Tom Baker <tom@tombaker.org>
Received on Saturday, 10 September 2011 18:00:41 UTC