- From: Adrian Walker <adrianw@snet.net>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:11:00 -0400
- To: "Steven Pemberton" <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org, semantic-web@w3.org, www-tag@w3.org
Hi Steven and All -- I'm a latecomer to this discussion, but are tinyurls [1] relevant? Cheers, -- Adrian [1] tinyurl.com Internet Business Logic (R) Executable open vocabulary English Online at www.reengineeringllc.com Tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/gktks Shared use is free Adrian Walker Reengineering PO Box 1412 Bristol CT 06011-1412 USA Phone: USA 860 583 9677 Cell: USA 860 830 2085 Fax: USA 860 314 1029 At 10:56 PM 6/26/2006 +0200, you wrote: >On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 16:44:16 +0200, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote: > >>>7 Each language must specify: >> >>It's already the case that we have a generic URI syntax specification, >>which includes one abbreviation mechanism (URI references), and >>every format/syntax can use URI references and/or other >>URI abbreviation mechanisms. >> >>It's not clear to me what CURIEs are, beyond that. > >Let's try an elevator pitch: > > CURIEs are a way of abbreviating URIs. They are useful for > authoring when >a number of similar URIs have to be repeatedly used. They also >significantly reduce the size of certain types of document. QNames have >been used for this purpose in several specifications, but apart from some >philosophical problems with their use, because of restrictions on their >syntax they also don't allow the abbreviation of arbitrary URIs, which >gets in the way of markup that needs to allow just that. > >Steven >
Received on Monday, 26 June 2006 21:11:05 UTC