- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 20:14:40 +0200
- To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
* Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: >I don't follow. Is it the "IRI" part or the "is" part that you object >to? (Perhaps this is in the context of preferring the spec to refer to >URI refs instead of IRIs.) Well, CSS has url(), XML DSig has URI="", if SPARQL uses isIRI() it's probably just a matter of time until we agree on yet a different term for resource identifiers in which case the name becomes obsolete and we'd have to deal with yet more confusion. Names that omit reference to the current terminology would avoid this problem, e.g. isRI, isRe- source, etc. would all work for me, but the WG probably knows best what'd be a good replacement. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Monday, 1 August 2005 18:14:49 UTC