- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 23:02:48 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 10:13 AM 10/4/01 -0500, 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
Yes
>http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/w3-rdf-mt-2.1_draft.html
Yes
>http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/w3-rdf-mt-2.1_draft.html#rdf_entail
No: has fragment identifier
>http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type
No: has fragment identifier
>rdf:type
No: is QName (unless rdf: here is used as a URI scheme name). This
particular Qname, assuming common usage of rdf: as a namespace prefix,
represents a URI with fragment identifier. But in general a QName _may_
represent a URI.
>aaa
No: is relative-URI (possibly)
...
From RFC 2396:
4. URI References
The term "URI-reference" is used here to denote the common usage of a
resource identifier. A URI reference may be absolute or relative,
and may have additional information attached in the form of a
fragment identifier. However, "the URI" that results from such a
reference includes only the absolute URI after the fragment
identifier (if any) is removed and after any relative URI is resolved
to its absolute form. Although it is possible to limit the
discussion of URI syntax and semantics to that of the absolute
result, most usage of URI is within general URI references, and it is
impossible to obtain the URI from such a reference without also
parsing the fragment and resolving the relative form.
URI-reference = [ absoluteURI | relativeURI ] [ "#" fragment ]
...
#g
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 4 October 2001 18:11:21 UTC