- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:04:52 -0400
- To: Roy T.Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Cc: "Clive D.W. Feather" <clive@demon.net>, uri@w3.org
At 11:33 AM -0700 8/18/04, Roy T.Fielding wrote: >Which would be false because there are such things as Relative URIs. >They just aren't URIs. This is exactly the confusion I'm militating against. The idea that "relative URIs" are not a subset of "URIs" is simply bad terminology and it needs to be fixed. Any normal person is going to say, of course a relative URI is a URI. Either let's redefine "URI" so that a relative URI is a URI or let's stop talking about relative URIs. The current path is just too damn confusing. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003) http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2004 19:26:09 UTC