- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 19:43:20 +0100
- To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
At 07:37 PM 9/26/01 +0300, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: >While URLs and URNs no longer are considered to represent disjunct >partitions of URI space, they still (to my understanding) are considered >to be valid and necessary concepts distinguishing between resources >which are expected to have some "physical" online realization and >those which are trully abstract. > >For those who haven't seen it yet, cf >http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-uri-clarification-20010921/. Er, the disjointness of URLs and URNs is one of the few definite distinctions that is asserted by that document: [[[ The phrase "URL scheme" is now used infrequently, usually to refer to some subclass of URI schemes which exclude URNs. ]]] -- (Last sentence of section 1.2) I'd also say that the document plays down the "necessity" of distinction: [[[ ... the term "URL" does not refer to a formal partition of URI space; rather, URL is a useful but informal concept... ]]] -- (section 1.2) #g ------------ Graham Klyne GK@NineByNine.org
Received on Thursday, 27 September 2001 06:16:14 UTC