- From: Raphaël Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
- Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 11:59:13 +0200
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- CC: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Hi Silvia, > As discussed in the last telephone conference, I have updated the > requirements document and the specification with a short paragraph in > the Terminology section that explains that we use "URI" where "URI > reference" may need to be used. Great, thanks! Your text was: "According to RFC3986 RFC 3986, URIs that contain a fragment are not actually URIs, but URI references relative to the name space of another URI. When this specification talks about media fragment URIs, it actually means media fragment URI references. Since this is quite a mouthful, the specification will imply URI references in the user of the word URI." that I have slightly updated to: "According to RFC 3986, URIs that contain a fragment are actually not URIs, but URI references relative to the namespace of another URI. In this document, when the term 'media fragment URIs' is used, it actually means 'media fragment URI references'." Tracker, that close ACTION-103 Raphaël -- Raphaël Troncy EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department 2229, route des Crêtes, 06560 Sophia Antipolis, France. e-mail: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr & raphael.troncy@gmail.com Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242 Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200 Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/
Received on Tuesday, 8 September 2009 10:00:22 UTC