- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 11:40:51 -0500
- To: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>This is for information, no action requested. > >First, the minutes of the URI BOF held at the last IETF meeting are at [1]: > >Also, there is an issue list [2] > >[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2003Mar/0043.html > >[2] http://www.apache.org/~fielding/uri/rev-2002/issues.html > >... > >And so to the blank URI question: > >I was reminded obliquely (by a comment about splitting URIs into >QNames in Jena) that the folks looking at RFC2396bis (URI spec >revision) have raised the issue of how to treat fragments attached >to blank URIs. What is a blank URI?? Does it have anything to do with a blank node in RDF? (I hope not.) Pat > >Currently, according to RFC2396, #frag is always relative to the >current document rather than the current URI resolution base. This >caused us some debate about how to deal with xml:base in RDF. > >The current thinking in the URI group is to replace this with a >discussion of (non-) retrieval when a bare fragment is used: > >[[ >017-rdf-fragment: >One cannot use the fragment to indicate relative to a base document, >other than to the current document. Some want to allow XML parsers >for RDF to use base URI+fragment together. The proposal would replace >discussion in current document with extended discussion of retrieval >when base is same as current document. There was support for this the >floor. >]] >-- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2003Mar/0043.html > >[[ >Note that this issue is a request to change the "current document" >algorithm. This can be accomplished by changing the spec to remove >the bit about current document and instead replace the empty URI with >the base URI, later stating that a retrieval action must not take place >if the new URI differs from the base URI only by its fragment. >]] >-- http://www.apache.org/~fielding/uri/rev-2002/issues.html#017-rdf-fragment > >(Actually, I think there's a typo there in the issue list: the >minutes reflect my understanding.) > >#g > > >------------------- >Graham Klyne ><GK@NineByNine.org> >PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9 A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes s.pam@ai.uwf.edu for spam
Received on Friday, 18 April 2003 12:40:55 UTC