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

Re: URI versus URI Reference

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 20:30:56 -0700
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@attlabs.att.com>
cc: abrahams@acm.org, michaelm@netsol.com, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, xml-uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <200005272031.aa03102@gremlin-relay.ics.uci.edu>
I honestly don't see what the big deal is regarding this stuff.
If there needs to be another BNF entry, we can add one.  If XML
wants a single BNF token right now to represent the exact meaning
of the term as used in a specific setting, then they can very well
create one of their own using the other BNF terms in the URI spec.
It doesn't have to be in RFC 2396 just to define a given syntax.
Sure, it would be nice, but then so would a time machine.

....Roy
Received on Saturday, 27 May 2000 23:31:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:43 UTC