- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 02:51:34 +0200
- To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
- Cc: public-iri@w3.org
* John C Klensin wrote: >And, fwiw, I think that is another symptom of lack of broad >consensus about whether IRIs are part of UI/presentation >interfaces or are protocol elements. Proceeding simultaneously >as if they are both, or whichever is convenient at the moment, >does not make it easy to think clearly about those role, much >less identify them. I would find it very helpful if you could discuss that point without using the term "protocol element". draft-duerst-iri-00 will be a de- cade old on Tuesday and it says in the first sub-clause of the first sentence of the Abstract that IRIs are protocol elements; RFC 3987 does the same. RFC 3987 might be using the term incorrectly, but in the language of RFC 3987 IRIs are protocol elements by definition. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Sunday, 15 April 2012 00:51:54 UTC