W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > November 2010

Re: RDF URI References

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:54:33 +0000
Message-ID: <4CD2BB19.5000609@webr3.org>
To: Damian Steer <pldms@mac.com>
CC: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Damian Steer wrote:
> On 04/11/10 13:29, Nathan wrote:
>> Hi All,
> 
>> However, the definition of an "RDF URI Reference" is:
>>
>> "an absolute URI with optional fragment identifier"
> 
> That's not the definition, and you've missed a significant of that 
> sentence:
> 
> "A URI reference within an RDF graph (an RDF URI reference) is a Unicode 
> string [UNICODE] that:
> 
> * does not contain any control characters ( #x00 - #x1F, #x7F-#x9F)
> * and would produce a valid URI character sequence (per RFC2396 [URI], 
> sections 2.1) representing an absolute URI with optional fragment 
> identifier when subjected to the encoding described below."
> 
> Note that "...representing an absolute URI with optional fragment 
> identifier * when subjected to the encoding described below *". URIRef 
> allows characters that URI doesn't.
> 
> The explanation:
> 
> "Note: this section anticipates an RFC on Internationalized Resource 
> Identifiers. Implementations may issue warnings concerning the use of 
> RDF URI References that do not conform with [IRI draft] or its successors."
> 
> i.e. "we wanted to use IRI, but it hadn't finished".

Makes sense, so, many recent docs, formal and informal, mention 
explicitly "URI Reference" rather than "RDF URI Reference", "URI" or 
"IRI" - for future docs which term should be used?

Best,

Nathan
Received on Thursday, 4 November 2010 13:55:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:21 UTC