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

Re: Relative URI or relative URI reference

From: Jason Robinson <JRobinson@KitchenPages.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:26:15 +1000
Message-ID: <006701c485b5$6f748ae0$16ffa8c0@kitchenpages.net>
To: "John Cowan" <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>

Ask a dumb question, you get a dumber answer (especially from myself - lol).
"Stone lions are gargoyles" (because the words of 'stone' or 'lions'
separated by whitespace refer to a stone of lions which do not match the
defined meaning of such words except when used together as 'stone-lions' to
describe a thing/location - I do not know of Stone which/that has Lions).

1) http://foo.bar./
2) http://foo.bar/
3) http://foo.bar/.

The way I see this is where case 3 (above) is in 'Reference' to case 2.
So, I would assume that the current draft is correct along with the
reference to Stone lions even though it seems otherwise in some cases
(english is funny like that).  The full term of "Stone carved into Lion
shapes" seems better but, well - its just too long.

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Cowan" <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
To: "Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: Relative URI or relative URI reference

> Elliotte Rusty Harold scripsit:
> > 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.
> Do you think that stone lions, like the ones outside the New York
> Public Library, are lions?  They certainly don't belong to the
> species _Panthera leo_.
> --
> "Clear?  Huh!  Why a four-year-old child        John Cowan
> could understand this report.  Run out          jcowan@reutershealth.com
> and find me a four-year-old child.  I           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
> can't make head or tail out of it."
>         --Rufus T. Firefly on government reports
Received on Thursday, 19 August 2004 06:22:16 UTC

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