- 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