- From: Stephen Cranefield <SCranefield@infoscience.otago.ac.nz>
- Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:23:03 +1200
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Sean Palmer wrote:
> I think you'll find that a) FragID syntax is independant of
> URI scheme [...]
I'm not convinced this is true. The definition of a fragment
identifier says (at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt):
When a URI reference is used to perform a retrieval action on the
identified resource, the optional fragment identifier, separated from
the URI by a crosshatch ("#") character, consists of additional
reference information to be interpreted by the user agent after the
retrieval action has been successfully completed. As such, it is not
part of a URI, but is often used in conjunction with a URI.
This specifically defines a fragment URI as information related
to a retrieval action. Therefore one could argue that it doesn't make
sense to have a fragment identifier if the URI scheme is intended to
denote names with no implied retrieval mechanism.
- Stephen
Received on Friday, 24 August 2001 02:21:22 UTC