W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2011

Re: IRIs vs. URIs in SPARQL spec

From: Bob DuCharme <bob@snee.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 09:19:47 -0500
Message-ID: <4D74E983.7070002@snee.com>
To: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
CC: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Thanks Dave... so if 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/#section-Graph-URIref says 
that "RDF URI references are compatible withInternational Resource 
Identifiers <http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-xml-names11-20031105/#IRIs>as 
defined by [XML Namespaces 1.1 
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/#ref-xml-names11>]", does 
this mean that URI References do allow non-US-ASCII characters, so that 
http://www.example.org/Montréal is a valid URI Reference but not a valid 
URI? And that if "isURI is an alternate spelling for the isIRI 
operator", as the SPARQL spec says, then the latter refers to URI 
references and not to URIs?



On 3/7/2011 3:34 AM, Dave Reynolds wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 13:45 -0500, Bob DuCharme wrote:
>> The SPARQL specs says in two places that "IRIs are a subset of RDF URI
>> References that omits spaces." I have trouble seeing it as a subset for
>> two reasons:
>> 1. The  http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt document that it references
>> says that it "defines a new protocol element called Internationalized
>> Resource Identifier (IRI) by extending the syntax of URIs to a much
>> wider repertoire of characters."
> Note that those statements in the SPARQL spec are not about URIs but
> about "RDF URI References" [1], these are not the same thing. RDF URI
> References were an attempt by the RDF Core WG to be compatible with IRIs
> before the IRI spec was finalized - an attempt which was very successful
> apart from the the handling of spaces.
> Dave
> [1]
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/#section-Graph-URIref
Received on Monday, 7 March 2011 14:20:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:24 UTC