- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 11:28:24 -0400
- To: Damian Steer <pldms@mac.com>
- Cc: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr>, nathan@webr3.org, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 14:03 +0000, Damian Steer wrote:
> On 04/11/10 14:00, Antoine Zimmermann wrote:
> > Le 04/11/2010 14:54, Nathan a écrit :
>
> >> 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?
> >
> > I guess IRI should be the best choice. BTW, the OWL 2 specifications
> > exclusively rely on IRIs in place where OWL 1 was using URIs and URI
> > references.
>
> +1.
>
> SPARQL uses IRI [1]
As does RIF.
-- Sandro
>
> Damian
>
> [1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#QSynIRI>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 4 November 2010 15:28:39 UTC