- From: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@cwi.nl>
- Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:28:24 +0200
- To: Sami Vaarala <sami.vaarala@codebay.fi>
- CC: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Conrad Parker <conrad@metadecks.org>, public-media-fragment@w3.org
Dear Sami, Silvia, >> According to RFC 3986, the term "URI" does not include relative >> references. In this document, we want to cover both, URIs and relative >> references. This requires us to use the term "URI reference" according >> to RC 3986. For simplicity reasons, this document, however, only uses >> the term 'media fragment URI' in place of 'media fragment URI >> reference'. > > This sounds good to me :) Thanks for your comment and the discussion. @Silvia: I slightly changed your paragraph and updated correspondingly the latest editor's draft: "According to RFC 3986, the term "URI" does not include relative references. In this document, we consider both URIs and relative references. Consequently, we use the term "URI reference" as defined in RFC 3986 (section 4.1). For simplicity reasons, this document, however, only uses the term "media fragment URI" in place of "media fragment URI reference"." Cheers. 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.eurecom.fr/~troncy/
Received on Wednesday, 28 April 2010 12:30:11 UTC