- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:14:07 +0000
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 09:20 31/10/03 +0000, Brian McBride wrote: >I interpret this as a proposal to remove test case > > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/xmlbase/test012 > >which I suggest we discuss at today's telecon. I was already thinking of suggesting that this test case be removed, since it doesn't really illustrate anything about RDF, but about URIs. >A possible response to the commentor might be: > >[[ >Thank you for pointing out this proposed change to RFC 2396 which we had >been unaware of. > >RDFCore have resolved to remove this test case. > >RDFCore would advise implementors that consume RDF that the RDFCore specs >are based on RFC 2396, a strict interpretation of which states that URI's >with too many ".."'s in their path are an error, though many URI >implementations correct that error and RFC 2396bis proposes to require >that correction. Implementors are free to choose whether to strictly >comply with RFC 2396 or be more liberal. I have broad agreement with the thrust here, but the last sentence might be interpreted as official permission to be non-standard. I suggest dropping it. >RDFCore advises implementors and content creators that produce RDF that >creating URI's with too many ".."'s in their path is inadvisable and may >lead to interoperability problems. >]] I agree, with caveat as noted. #g ------------ Graham Klyne For email: http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Friday, 31 October 2003 06:36:30 UTC