- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 16:38:26 -0600
- To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>On 2002-02-18 3:20 AM, "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote: > >>> Of course! I don't think anyone disagrees with that. The issue at hand is >>> whether we can define it as naming an abstract resource. See my message >>> "URIs vs. URIviews (core issue)". >> Hmmm, that seems like a question about the nature of resources and what >> names them. These are questions we have kicked to the tag. > >No, the issue is what URI-references name. I think it's pretty unambiguously >clear I very much doubt it. Everything Ive read about what URI-references name or mean has been almost impenetrably murky and so ambiguous as to be meaningless, if taken literally. > and I've seen Roy Fielding, Al Gilman, and many others say the same >thing. I guess we could take it to the TAG if we wanted to be absolutely >sure, but I'm not sure how they can say anything different than what the >spec says. RFC2396 seems to be pretty clear that frags, while not technically part of the URI, are expected to be used with URIs (why else exclude '#' from the URI BNF ?.) I really do not understand what the problem is here, from reading RFC2396. It says quite clearly that urirefs CAN contain fragIds. I would also observe that all the web browsers I use seem to be able to handle fragIds without any problems. > >> Have I understood you correctly? You are arguing, not that we should >> answer this question, but that we should discourage folks from using uri's >> with frag id's until this has been cleaned up? > >I think the question is answered (feel free to look at the text in RFC2396 >and decide for yourself). That text certainly does not say that such use is discouraged or deprecated. To me it gives a very strong impression in the other direction, eg section 4.3 " A URI reference is typically parsed according to the four main components and fragment identifier in order to determine what components are present and whether the reference is relative or absolute. " which seems to assume that parsing a URI reference should take into account any fragIds, rather than ignore them. > But yes, I think we should discourage their use as >a way to stop things from getting worse. I still fail to follow exactly in what way the situation is bad here. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Monday, 18 February 2002 17:38:19 UTC