W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webid@w3.org > November 2012

Re: WebID-ISSUE-71 (uri-iri): Switch from URI to IRI terminology [WebID definition]

From: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:14:13 -0500
Message-ID: <CAGR+nnGKV4XS4Sq9rzsW-yB0XGZS0dv3wMSkw3hG_fCQF0iC3Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: nathan@webr3.org
Cc: WebID Community Group <public-webid@w3.org>
seems like a no brainer. I'll wait for the spec to become a bit more stable
before making these changes.

Steph
On Nov 23, 2012 4:43 PM, "Nathan" <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:

> WebID Community Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>
>> WebID-ISSUE-71 (uri-iri): Switch from URI to IRI terminology [WebID
>> definition]
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2005/**Incubator/webid/track/issues/**71<http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/track/issues/71>
>>
>> Raised by: Stéphane Corlosquet
>> On product: WebID definition
>>
>> A few people mentioned using the term "IRI" instead of "URI" in the WebID
>> specifications. Antoine mentioned it at [1], Larry Masinter alluded to it
>> at [2] and Kingsley at [3].
>>
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-webid/2012Oct/**
>> 0241.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/2012Oct/0241.html>
>> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/www-tag/2012Nov/0024.**html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2012Nov/0024.html>
>> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-webid/2012Nov/**
>> 0216.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/2012Nov/0216.html>
>>
>
> +1 to IRI, as per RDF specifications - perhaps we're just used to saying
> URI in conversations - can't see how we can possibly go back to URI (even
> RDF 1.0 didn't use URI!)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Nathan
>
>
Received on Friday, 23 November 2012 22:14:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:05:46 UTC