W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > October 2001

Re: Suggestion for next round of model theory document

From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 10:40:43 -0500
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Message-Id: <2BE7DFCD-B8DE-11D5-B5C4-003065D5CE46@upclink.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


> http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/w3-rdf-mt-2.1_draft.html


> 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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:05 UTC