W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-iri@w3.org > May 2004

Re: draft-duerst-iri-07.txt: 2 week mailing list last call

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 14:44:55 +0900
Message-Id: <>
To: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, public-iri@w3.org

Okay, thanks, closed.      Martin.

At 10:16 04/05/20 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote:

>Looks good to me:  I support closure.  Thanks.
>At 15:11 20/05/04 +0900, Martin Duerst wrote:
>>Hello Graham,
>>At 09:42 04/05/19 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote:
>>>At 12:07 19/05/04 +0900, Martin Duerst wrote:
>>>>Coming back to your original point, I have reworded
>>>>    For comparison, such conversions MUST only be done on the fly,
>>>>    while retaining the original IRI.
>>>>    In order to conserve the original IRIs, such conversions SHOULD
>>>>    only be done on the fly, while retaining the IRIs.
>>>I think that's better, but I still think it is making normative 
>>>statements about implementation technique, which was the point of my 
>>>original comment.  (And I think the normative point you do want to make 
>>>really should be a MUST!)
>>>For example, I think this this might say what you want without dictating 
>>>If the IRI is to be passed to another application, or used further in 
>>>some other way, its original form MUST be preserved;  the conversion 
>>>described here should be performed only for the purpose of local comparison.
>>Okay, now I understand: You wanted the 'on the fly' removed, because
>>this would have forbidden caching,... I have used your text, and
>>tentatively closed this issue.
>>Regards,    Martin.
>Graham Klyne
>For email:
Received on Friday, 28 May 2004 01:46:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:14:31 UTC