uri@w3.org from May 2001 by author

Aaron Swartz

• Re: Are URI-References bound to resources? (Sunday, 13 May)
• Are URI-References bound to resources? (Friday, 11 May)
• Re: URIs: Identifiers in name, but... (Monday, 7 May)
• Re: Tag Time Issues (Friday, 4 May)

Al Gilman

• URIs: Identifiers in name, but... (Wednesday, 2 May)
• Re: Should tags be URNs? (was Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs) (Wednesday, 2 May)

Bjoern Hoehrmann

• Re: Are URI-References bound to resources? (Friday, 11 May)

by way of Martin Duerst

• Re: Are URI-References bound to resources? (Tuesday, 15 May)
• More URI Schemas (Tuesday, 8 May)

Dan Connolly

• Goodbye, Douglas Adams [was: Are URI...] (Monday, 14 May)
• Re: Are URI-References bound to resources? (Monday, 14 May)
• Re: Are URI-References bound to resources? (Friday, 11 May)
• Re: Are URI-References bound to resources? (Friday, 11 May)

Graham Klyne

• Re: Are URI-References bound to resources? (Monday, 14 May)

Michael Mealling

• Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs (Monday, 7 May)
• Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs (Monday, 7 May)
• Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs (Monday, 7 May)
• Re: Should tags be URNs? (was Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs) (Tuesday, 1 May)

Roy T. Fielding

• Re: Are URI-References bound to resources? (Monday, 14 May)
• Re: Are URI-References bound to resources? (Friday, 11 May)
• Re: Are URI-References bound to resources? (Friday, 11 May)
• Re: Should tags be URNs? (was Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs) (Friday, 4 May)
• Re: Should tags be URNs? (was Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs) (Friday, 4 May)

Sean B. Palmer

• Re: Goodbye, Douglas Adams (Monday, 14 May)
• Re: URIs: Identifiers in name, but... (Wednesday, 2 May)

Simon St.Laurent

• Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs (Monday, 7 May)
• Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs (Monday, 7 May)

Tim Kindberg

• Re: Should tags be URNs? (was Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs) (Friday, 4 May)
• Re: Should tags be URNs? (was Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs) (Friday, 4 May)
• Re: Should tags be URNs? (was Re: Proposal: 'tag' URIs) (Friday, 4 May)

Last message date: Monday, 14 May 2001 22:14:46 UTC