Re: RFC 3986 and RDF URI reference

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 6 Apr 2006, at 16:19, Daniele Alessandrelli wrote:

>
> Hello all,
>
> I am a bit puzzled about the concept of URI in RDF models given the  
> difference between the RFC 2396 , which is mentioned directly in  
> the RDF Concepts document [1], and the defintion in RFC 3986.
>
> given the new RFC is it correct to use the term URI in place of  
> what was defined as URIREF in RDF Concepts?
>
> Thanks
> Dany

I believe you should be (mentally) substituting IRI (RFC 3987) for  
URIREF. I believe that RDF Core were anticipating what IRIs would be  
with URIREFs, and SPARQL uses IRIs rather than URIREFs.

The RDFCore issue was Williams-02. See e.g. [1] and [2].

Hope I've got this right, RDFCore veterans.

Damian

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003AprJun/ 
0031.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0128.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFENUmwAyLCB+mTtykRAn/VAKDiI6bNDtEBHLiQaBgI0cHgEQkzDQCgm5u6
U/Y6Ob4O1FVqhtMcAJVlk3A=
=InDq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Thursday, 6 April 2006 17:02:53 UTC