W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2011

Re: URL/URI/IRI resolution in HTML5/RDF/RDFa

From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 15:41:00 +0900
Message-ID: <4EB2377C.4060504@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
CC: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>
Hello Jeni,

Can you please forward the information below to the RDFa WG and other 
relevant parties?

On 2011/11/03 3:07, Jeni Tennison wrote:
> Larry,
> On 2 Nov 2011, at 17:30, Larry Masinter wrote:
>> " This behaviour by HTML5 was the subject of a long-running issue [4], which I believe Larry was involved in, which was eventually resolved to give the specification we see today."
>> The IRI/HTML5 issue is still being worked on actively.
> Ah right. What's the HTML issue or bug and what's the current status?

The IETF IRI WG's mailing list is hosted by the W3C at

Archives and subscription instructions are at

Joining the WG is done by joining the mailing list, and there are no 
minimal time commitments, although any kind of contribution and help is 

The list of documents, charter, and so on, can be found at

More information can be found on the tools page at

The list of issues can be found at

I very strongly suggest that you enter a new issue/new issues for the 
topic of RDFa in HTML. While these will be related to the generic HTML 
issues, they are not the same.

To enter issues, you need a login, which you can obtain from 

>> " The RDFWAWG has opened rdfa-ISSUE-114 on this [10] which is on their agenda for discussion tomorrow. Do we have any advice for them?"
>> My advice is that they make sure their requirements for IRI standards are clear and to get them accepted by the IETF IRI working group, which is chartered to develop a solution that meets the broader requirements not only for browsers (HTML5) but for other applications that need IRIs that have nothing to do with HTML except for the possibility of copy/paste.
> I think that RDFa is only interested in IRIs because RDF is and RDFa wants to support all RDF.

Well, RDF allows IRIs (and not just URIs) because this can often be very 
handy, e.g. in ontologies in languages that are written with non-ASCII 
characters,... The same applies to RDFa.

Regards,    Martin.
Received on Thursday, 3 November 2011 06:41:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:41 UTC