- From: Stephen Cranefield <SCranefield@infoscience.otago.ac.nz>
- Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 11:19:04 +1200
- To: "'uri@w3.org'" <uri@w3.org>
Is it valid to use a fragment identifier with a URN? The definition
of a fragment identifier in RFC2396 suggests that they are only
relevant to URLs:
When a URI reference is used to perform a retrieval action on the
identified resource, the optional fragment identifier, separated from
the URI by a crosshatch ("#") character, consists of additional
reference information to be interpreted by the user agent after the
retrieval action has been successfully completed.
This specifically defines a fragment identifier to be information
related to a retrieval action, which implies that it makes no
sense to use a fragment identifier with a URI scheme intended to
denote names with no implied retrieval mechanism. However, I have
certainly seen them used with URNs. Has this issue been clarified
in any documents subsequent to RFC2396?
- Stephen
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Cranefield
Department of Information Science
University of Otago
Dunedin, New Zealand
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2001 19:16:35 UTC