[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: URI indigestion

• To: 'John Cowan' <jcowan@r...>
• Subject: RE: URI indigestion
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 14:22:46 -0500
• Cc: dareo@m..., mc@x..., xml-dev@l...

What would be the impact on RDF if it used these 
instead of URIs?

Honest question because I don't use RDF but note 
that the current controversy started there.

I loved the message in your sig.  It speaks 
to the "politics of meaning".

len

From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@r...]

"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" scripsit:

> I also believe in markup Off The Web.  That is 
> one reason I like to keep Public IDs as an 
> option.  Call them URNs if you like.   

I do like, and consequently there is a mapping from
Public IDs to a subset of URNs (those which begin
"urn:publicid:";).

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: URI indigestion
    • From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>
  • Re: URI indigestion
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
  • RE: URI indigestion
    • From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@e...>

• Prev by Date: Re: URI indigestion
• Next by Date: Re: URI indigestion
• Previous by thread: Re: SI-URIs (was Re: URI indigestion)
• Next by thread: RE: URI indigestion
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread