RE: Permit URI References instead of URIs

Accepted.


On Tue, 2004-09-21 at 14:21, Jonathan Marsh wrote:
> Thanks for your comment.  The Working Group decided to allow # (URI ->
> URI Reference) everywhere but targetNamespace.  If you don't respond by
> October 1, we'll assume you accept this resolution.
> 
> [See http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/#LC8]
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-desc-
> > comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Booth
> > Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 5:27 PM
> > To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
> > Subject: Permit URI References instead of URIs
> > 
> > 
> > In sections 2.7 and 2.8, we use URIs to identify Features and
> > Properties.  For example, section 2.7.1 says:
> > [[
> > {name} REQUIRED. A wsdls:anyURI as defined in 2.15.4 anyURI Type.
> > ]]
> > and anyURI is defined as:
> > [[
> > 2.15.4 anyURI Type
> > The value space of the wsdls:anyURI type consists of all Uniform
> > Resource Identifiers (URI) as defined by [IETF RFC 2396] and amended
> by
> > [IETF RFC 2732].
> > ]]
> > 
> > I think we should allow these to be URI References instead restricting
> > them to be only URIs.  (I.e., allow them to contain fragment
> > identifiers.)  That would permit multiple, related Features or
> > Properties to be described in the same document, using different
> > fragment identifiers to distinguish them, such as:
> > 
> > http://example.org/my_related_features_and_properties#a
> > http://example.org/my_related_features_and_properties#b
> > http://example.org/my_related_features_and_properties#c
> > 
> > This would also allow conformance to the practice that some recommend
> > for the Semantic Web, of using fragment identifiers when identifying
> > things that are not documents, such as abstract concepts.
> > --
> > 
> > David Booth
> > W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
> > 
-- 

David Booth
W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard

Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2004 19:13:14 UTC