- From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:27:24 -0400
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
*** triviality alert ***
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote:
> Which leads me to the idea that they ought to always have a hash in them, to avoid this tarpit. So they are URIrefs, not URIs.
I hate to say this, Pat, but you're out of date with respect to URI
terminology. You are indeed correct according to RFC 2396 (1998) - the
# occurs in the production for the "URI-reference" nonterminal. (There
is no "URI" nonterminal but it would make sense to assume a "URI" was
either an "absoluteURI" or a "relativeURI", neither of which allows
#.) However, its replacement, RFC 3986 (2005), has the following:
URI-reference = URI / relative-ref
URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]
so those absolute but #-containing things we used to call URIrefs have
all been promoted to URI status. To which I say, congratulations!
Jonathan
Received on Friday, 25 March 2011 22:27:51 UTC