Re: Indicating Skolem Nodes (was Re: AW: {Disarmed} Re: blank nodes (once again))

On Mar 26, 2011, at 8:47 AM, Jonathan Rees wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Pat Hayes <> wrote:
>> On Mar 25, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Jonathan Rees wrote:
>>> *** triviality alert ***
>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Pat Hayes <> 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 I hate to say this, Pat, but you're out of date with respect to URI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.
>> Say it, say it. I know I am woefully behind the times here.
>>> 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!
>> Then I am confused about http-range-14. My understanding was that the 303 requirement applied to 'bare' URIs which denote non-information resources, but not to (what used to be called) URI references. So for example ex:this must give a 303 if it is to denote, say, a planet; but ex:that#this can denote anything at all without HTTP having to do anything special. Is this distinction no longer meaningful?
> The distinction is still meaningful; upgrading the URI spec doesn't
> change the resolution. The wording of the resolution is awkward in a
> number of ways but its intent is clear, in the context of the
> discussion that led up to it. Roy (and those who voted in favor) took
> "http: URIs" to mean http: URIs sensu RFC 2396, not http: URIs sensu
> 3986.

Oh well, that is a relief. But now, purely as a matter of terminology, how do we describe the distinction (between he URis which require a 303 and those that don't, the ones that used to be URIrefs) using the terminology of 3986? They are all URIs, but some need a 303 while others escape this silliness. And those are...what?


> Best
> Jonathan

IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile

Received on Saturday, 26 March 2011 22:51:14 UTC