- From: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 18:42:48 +0100
Ian Hickson wrote: > On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > >> Since IRI is now a RFC, shouldn't Web Forms use that term instead >> of URI? >> >> (For example, in section 2.12. I guess once UAs start supporting >> IRIs you want a list of IRIs there, not just URIs.) > > I've already updated all the cases that really matter. For the most > part I'd like to just stick to calling things URIs since otherwise > people will just get more and more confused (most people still think > they're URLs...). Does that matter for a specification? If you do it, you might want to add a line somewhere that URI and IRI are used interchangeable. Also, I think WF2 should refer to RFC3986 instead of RFC1738 since the former updates the latter. RFC3986 is an internet standard and obsoletes various other documents as well. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>
Received on Thursday, 3 February 2005 09:42:48 UTC