- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:16:52 -0500
- To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, WWW-Tag <www-tag@w3.org>
I think the sentence "Put another way, it is often possible to determine that two URIs are the same, but it is in general never possible to be sure that they are different." is incorrect, and should be deleted. The previous sentence, "comparisons of two URIs can establish with confidence that they are equivalent and identify the same resource" is correct. However, just because two URIs identify the same resource does not imply they are the same URI. Under URI schemes, the word "prefix" is not in keeping with RFC 2396 terminology. 2396 uses the word "prefix" only twice, and in both cases it clearly means something different than you mean here. I believe the correct term is "scheme name". or just "scheme". In "Comparison of Relative URI References" the claim is made that URI references can be relative and URIs cannot be. I've heard this before, but I don't think RFC 2396 actually states this. My reading of 2396 is that relative things are indeed URIs (and also URI references). The authors of 2396 may have intended that all URIs be absolute. However, they failed to put such language into the spec. -- +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer | +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) | | http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ | | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ | | Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Received on Friday, 6 December 2002 08:38:07 UTC