- From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 10:40:43 -0500
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
On Thursday, October 4, 2001, at 10:13 AM, Pat Hayes wrote: > Now I am confused. I thought that the usage of 'URI' in the MT > document was correct. Which of the following are URIs, can > anyone give me some insight? > > http://www.coginst.uwf.edu URI > http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/w3-rdf-mt-2.1_draft.html URI > http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/w3-rdf- > mt-2.1_draft.html#rdf_entail URI plus a fragment identifier > http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type URI plus a fragment identifier > rdf:type a QName which may in some instances abbreviate a URI > aaa possibly a relative URI > Aaron, would it be OK if I just used the N-triples term > 'uriref' for the node labels? I don't want to proliferate names > unnecessarily. Or, I could consistently refer to 'URI labels' > in the text, after explaining that this means, using Graham's > wording. uriref is fine with me. -- [ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ]
Received on Thursday, 4 October 2001 11:40:46 UTC