W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > September 2001

RE: Using fragment identifiers with URNs

From: Stephen Cranefield <SCranefield@infoscience.otago.ac.nz>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 16:09:04 +1200
Message-ID: <B57613845A50D211864C0000F8FA5C2804207621@mars.otago.ac.nz>
To: "'uri@w3.org'" <uri@w3.org>
Me> Actually, I'm not proposing making a change, just finding out how
Me> compatible the IETF notion of a URI is with the use of a URI scheme
Me> to represent abstract names with no retrieval semantics. [...]

Al Gilman>                 ... with no associated Resources?             <<<

The resource could be an abstract concept or property such as the
notion of the height of something, or a physical entity such as the
tree outside my window.

> What does the 'opaquelocktoken' scheme have to tell us here?
> 
> Is this compatible with the IETF doctrine on URIs?  
> 
> Can someone construct a scenario in which a #fragment 
> appended to one of these
> would ever see a context of use?

Are these rhetorical questions?  If so, I'm afraid I don't get your
point.

- Stephen
Received on Friday, 28 September 2001 00:06:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:03 UTC