W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > September 2000

Re: Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-daigle-uri-std-00.txt

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 07:24:51 +0900
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.J.20000907072441.03508d30@sh.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp>
To: uri@w3.org
At 11:24 PM 9/5/00 -0400, Al Gilman wrote on xml-uri@w3.org:
 >There is a list <uri@w3.org> where these things do get discussed.  While
 >the traffic is only sporadic, most of the principal players do try to make
 >sure that issues get aired there.
 >
 >As you will see, this draft has not gone without comment
 ><http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/>.

Well, at least it's good to see that URIs as currently defined produce a
similar empty and unsatisfying feeling in some quarters of the RDF
community as well as in some quarters of the XML community.

I'll repeat my suggestion from earlier: either clarify RFC 2396 and give it
some meat - on the difficult questions like what a resource is, what an
identifier is, and how to compare resources and identifiers - or just call
it syntax for identifiers and leave it at that.

I'm happy to see this latest draft as a guide to URIs, but I don't think it
rates status other than informational.

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
XHTML: Migrating Toward XML
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books
Received on Wednesday, 6 September 2000 18:34:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:02 UTC