- From: David Wood <david.wood@talis.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 12:43:01 -0400
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: public-rdfa@w3.org, RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Hi all, The RDF Working Group [1] today resolved our ISSUE-08 [2], which decided the WG's position on the relationship of punycode and non-punycode URIs in RDF. The issue description was: [[ The IRI Spec[3] is from 2005, and it may be necessary to retrofit it to RDF. Eg, what is the relationship between "http://résumé.example.org" and "http://xn--rsum-bpad.example.org"? Are they the same resource or not? Note that SPARQL has something on that[4]... ]] We RESOLVED this issue "by keeping IRI-s and their punycode equivalent separate as different URI References in RDF." Please note that the term "URI References" is temporary and will very likely come to mean IRIs as the RDF WG work continues. I believe this closes a coordination issue between the RDF and RDFA WGs and hope that it helps you. Regards, Dave [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/ [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/8 [3] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#docTerminology
Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2011 16:43:40 UTC