- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:39:01 -0600
- To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
- CC: fmanola@mitre.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: [...] > > Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > > > > > Frank, > > > > > > I thought the draft on the data model section was > > > very well written, and I'm happy to see the clear > > > discussion about URLs vs. URIs (though you go on > > > to use HTTP URLs for abstract concepts anyway ;-) > > > > > > Yeah, well I didn't want to introduce (and have to explain) a new URI > > scheme. However, I can do that if you think it would make the > > distinction clearer. > > Actually, no. I think the recent "clarification" doesn't > clarify much, and in fact I prefer your present treatment. You owe uri@w3.org a comment to that effect, then. > I just thought you might toss in a few tag URIs or similar > to show a little more heterogeny. Frank, don't use unregistered URI schemes. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 13 November 2001 11:42:03 UTC