W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-uri@w3.org > May 2000

Re: URI versus URI Reference

From: Michael Mealling <michael@bailey.dscga.com>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 11:02:39 -0400
To: abrahams@acm.org
Cc: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>, timbl@w3.org, jcowan@reutershealth.com, xml-uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <20000525110239.B7740@bailey.dscga.com>
On Thu, May 25, 2000 at 10:39:24AM -0400, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
> John Cowan wrote:
> > Paul W. Abrahams scripsit:
> >
> > > Is there an explicit definition of ``the
> > > strict data type `URI' '' in 2396 that I've missed?
> >
> > Seemingly not.  However, 2396 supplies a generic syntax for URIs
> > and URI references.
> For URI references, yes.  For URIs, no.  There are no syntax rules with URI 
> on the left side.

Based on the concensus at the time the strict data type 'URI' was
denoted in the ABNF as the term 'absoluteURI'. The fact that the
ABNF term isn't called 'URI' was for clarity since that
simple acronym was used to many times within the ABNF.

I.e. the error may be on your part in insisting that since the ABNF
does not contain the term URI then it doesn't apply here. Indeed it
does and the question before everyone is, since the XML Namespace
document attempts to redefine the ABNF term 'URI-Reference' to
something that specifically violates the ABNF and the semantics the
document specifies for those terms, what part of the ABNF will
the next version (if there is a versioning) of the document adhere
to and not attempt to redefine.

As far as I can tell the ABNF gives you really two useful choices: 
'URI-reference' or 'absoluteURI'. 

This leaves you with three choices for moving forward to fix the problem: 
1) pick one of the two ABNF terms
2) say your not using URIs at all
3) rewrite 2396.....

My suggestion is #1 and that it be 'absoluteURI'...


Michael Mealling	|      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions	|          www.lp.org          |  michaelm@netsol.com
Received on Thursday, 25 May 2000 11:14:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:13:58 UTC