- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 18:16:46 +0100
- To: <Misha.Wolf@reuters.com>
- Cc: <duerst@w3.org>, <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
> > > - I18N recommend that the RDF graph use Internationalized Resource > > Identifiers [IRI] to identify nodes. > that then perhaps conflicts with the quoted text from IRI draft and Martin's comments. IRI draft: > b) Interpretational: URIs identify resources in various ways. IRIs > also indentify resources. The resource that an IRI identifies is > the same as the one identified by the URI obtained after > converting the IRI according to the procedure defined here. > This means that there is no need to define the association > between identifier and resource again on the IRI level. Martin: > For RDF, it would just mean that when you compare, > you may want to apply it, but you wouldn't convert and stay there; > you would keep the original. Unless I hear otherwise, I will interpret Martin's comments in light of the minuted recommendation above. (i.e. also "we may *not* want to apply it"). Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2002 13:17:08 UTC