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

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

From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:44:21 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=HYj0R7t3dpROxAcVG3hd_yoATGbB0FeC8wuzX@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote:
>
> 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?
>
> Pat

We have the folksy "slash URI", and lately I've been saying "hashless
URI", but I just looked in http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt  and
found the following, which might do the trick:

4.3.  Absolute URI

   Some protocol elements allow only the absolute form of a URI without
   a fragment identifier.  For example, defining a base URI for later
   use by relative references calls for an absolute-URI syntax rule that
   does not allow a fragment.

      absolute-URI  = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]

Best
Jonathan
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2011 14:44:59 UTC

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