- From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 17:22:05 -0400
- To: massimo@w3.org
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 05:14:12PM -0400, massimo@w3.org wrote: > > On Requirement 3.8 (Bookmarkable Queries), cf. > http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-rdf-dawg-uc-20040602/#r3.8 , > a question of clarification: > Does "express as a URI" means a new class of URIs will > be created? Or does it rather mean "embeddable in a URI" > > Obviously the first interpretation (esp. as a MUST) is > rather demanding. In the case of the first interpretation, > given the costs of creating a new URI scheme, what is > the rationale/benefit of going with the new URI scheme > rather than with the classic container approach? I'm not speaking for the original proposer of this requirement, but the understanding of the WG (which I think I understand and can represent) is "embeddable in an HTTP URI". No one on the WG has suggested we register a new URI scheme. There is an outstanding ACTION item to rework 3.8 to remove this ambiguity. Kendall Clark
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2004 17:24:21 UTC