W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > August 2004

Re: Relative URI or relative URI reference

From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:04:52 -0400
Message-Id: <p06010205bd495827972e@[192.168.254.88]>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:08 UTC