- From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:44:21 -0400
- 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