- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:41:42 -0800
- To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On Mon, 2001-12-17 at 16:22, Mark Baker wrote: >> Issue; URIs versus URI references >> >> This issue flares up every so often. I'm inclined to think there's a closely-related family of issues here that might reward exploration. Recently, the usage of URI machinery has spread across the landscape: XML namespaces, RDF's slight variation on that, XLink role/arcrole (see RDDL at http://www.rddl.org), and so on. Some of the decisions that arise when you're doing this are: - relative or absolute? - fragments OK or not? - URNs sometimes always or never? - the trick that RDF does of conventionally using a trailing # and relying on concatenation for finer-grain identification (not quite the same issue as fragments?) There have been some awfully extended debates around these things, and I think some dubious results - I've never been happy about the RDF trick. In any case, since the URI seems increasingly to be at the centre of everything, some decision procedures on how to use them properly would be useful. How important is this task in the spectrum of things to which the TAG could turn its attention? And a related issue - is this maybe the IETF's problem, not ours? I don't know. -Tim
Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2001 12:45:07 UTC