- From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
- Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 14:48:48 -0600
- To: duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
- CC: public-iri@w3.org
On 6/4/12 3:23 AM, iri issue tracker wrote: > #126: Fragments are part of URIs syntactically, but not part of URI scheme > definitions > > With respect to fragment identifiers, make sure that the following two > things are clear to people creating new schemes: > > 1) Fragment identifiers are part of URIs, and scheme definitions cannot > and MUST NOT disallow fragments on specific schemes (even if the usability > of a fragment id on the particular scheme being defined seems questionable > at the time the scheme definition is made). > > 2) Fragment identifiers are independent of schemes, depending on MIME > media types, and therefore scheme definitions cannot define anything about > fragment identifiers. <hat type='individual'/> More seriously, isn't this already covered by the following paragraph in Section 1 of version -04? A scheme definition cannot override the overall syntax for IRIs. For example, this means that fragment identifiers (#) cannot be re-used outside the generic syntax restrictions, and in particular scheme- specific syntax cannot override the fragment identifier syntax because it is generic. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 20:49:18 UTC