- From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:59:09 -0000
- To: "'Norman Walsh'" <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Hi Norm, > -----Original Message----- > From: Norman Walsh [mailto:Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM] > Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 4:08 PM > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: Rationalizing the term URI > > / "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org> was heard to say: > | URI reference - a string used in a language to specify a URI, for which > | relative form may be used where a base exists. ((This is not the only way of > | specifying the value of a URI - one can use various > | character sets, namespace prefixes, etc)) > > Until the TAG solves rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6, I'd want to be very > careful in what we say about namespace prefixes specifying URI > references. Yes...I feel equally cautious. > Namespace prefixes are part of a syntactic device for constructing a > QName which is a (URI, local-name) tuple, but they aren't URIs. Some one will probably beat me up for this... to be very clear... in the tuple above are you assuming the potential for 'URI' to include a (possibly null) fragment id... ie the tuple is (URIReference, local-name) and the (URIRef, local-name) -> URIRef mapping might get bit ugly if the LH URIRef carries a fragment. > Be seeing you, > norm Cheers, Stuart
Received on Thursday, 23 January 2003 12:59:40 UTC