- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 19:07:52 +0100
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dan Connolly writes: > On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 10:33 -0400, Jonathan Rees wrote: >> I was under the impression that the founding fathers meant for Link: >> and <link> to be compatible. We seem to have lost that possibility >> now, due to lack of coordination between groups working independently >> on extensions to HTTP and XHTML. > > They're still compatible if you consider both CURIEs and > URI references as syntactic sugar for URIs. But URI refs and CURIEs overlap lexically -- how are you supposed to tell whether mailto:robin is a URI reference or a CURIE? The TAG is on record [1] as saying CURIEs should not be deployed in existing contexts where URIs are currently specified. ht [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2008JanMar/0014.html - -- Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh Half-time member of W3C Team 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIyV54kjnJixAXWBoRAhFtAJ0cB+RmP6kkF3ecjDk6PZaZ6Fkx1wCfYF+j GXZ0+gb1075iEAoV1A9PSZQ= =ybUo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2008 18:08:32 UTC