[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: URLs and URIs (was XLink and mixed vocabulary design)
Tim Bray wrote: > On Jan 25, 2004, at 12:29 PM, Henrik Martensson wrote: > >> I have no qualms about exposing URLs. People are familiar with URLs, > >> and the notion of pointing to something using a URL is > >> well-understood. > > > > Agreed. (And thank you for writing "URL" and not "URI".) > > Well, there's nothing wrong with using URL as long as you are clear > exactly what you mean. "Uniform Resource Locator", or "URI intended to be used as an address" if you want to be terminologically correct. > This is made a bit more difficult by the fact > that there's no normative definition which is still in effect, last > time I checked. Hey, it's not *our* fault the people in charge of making the normative definitions don't believe in the difference between names and addresses :-) I'm with Simon and Hendrik: "URL" is a more precise term than "URI", even if it's not officially defined in an RFC. --Joe English jenglish@f...
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|