- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:59:13 +0200
- To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
As I understand / dimly remember, the RDFCore round of specs tried their best to anticipate the IRI specs, but could only make normative reference to the URI spec. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/ "Note: this section anticipates an RFC on Internationalized Resource Identifiers. Implementations may issue warnings concerning the use of RDF URI References that do not conform with [IRI draft] or its successors." ...whereas http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/ does not mention IRIs. Meanwhile http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/ "Turtle uses IRIs as term identifiers." For JSON my assumption has been that we would use IRI. Can this be confirmed? At the POI WG F2F we are looking at an example link to the page for Amsterdam in the Korean Wikipedia. I hope these come through the list OK. 1. the pretty link appears in Korean script (to me at least). { "url": "http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/암스테르담" } 2. if this is escaped so as to be a pre-IRI URI, we get instead an ugly string, twice as many chars: { "url": "http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%95%94%EC%8A%A4%ED%85%8C%EB%A5%B4%EB%8B%B4" } I'm agnostic for now, on question of where-or-whether this stuff gets canonicalised. But I would like to express a preference that verbose URI escape sequences are not imposed on eg. Korean URLs like the one given here. cheers, Dan
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2011 09:59:44 UTC