- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 14:17:06 +0300
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
Hi, On May 13, 2009, at 12:54, Henri Sivonen wrote: > itemprop may take an 'absolute URL'. However, an 'absolute URL' is > defined in terms of resolving onto itself and the algorithm for > resolving URIfies URLs. Therefore, it seems that an absolute IRI > cannot be an absolute URL. Since RDF seems to allow IRIs as > properties and the current practice is to allow IRIs in various > places, it seems to me that itemprop should take absolute IRIs > instead of absolute URLs or the definition of absolute URL should be > adjusted. I wrote the above on public-html. Hixie advised me to bring it to your attention specifically, because it seems the definition of 'absolute URL' has undesirable implications. That is, a definition under which an absolute IRI is also an absolute URL would be desirable. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 13 May 2009 11:17:49 UTC