Re: URNs and fragments (was: URN as namespace URI for RDF Schema)

• From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
• Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 03:44:40 -0700
• To: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
• Cc: "Hammond, Tony" <T.Hammond@nature.com>, mdirector@iptc.org, <uri@w3.org>
• Message-Id: <8F931DF5-16BB-11D9-8125-000393753936@gbiv.com>

On Oct 5, 2004, at 2:38 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:
> [Moved to URI list, since this is not really an RDF issue.  To URI 
> list members who haven't seen the earlier discussion, it's to do with 
> fragment identifiers and URNs. #g]
>
> I think the new URI spec is pretty clear on this.  I think it might be 
> worth clarifying the URN scheme syntax spec if/when it comes round for 
> revision.

Yes, the URN syntax should be clarified, but note that because "reserve"
in their sense means "do not use unencoded", the result is consistent
with the syntax of absolute-URI in rfc2396bis.

....Roy

Received on Tuesday, 5 October 2004 11:13:29 UTC