[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com> writes:
> Is that an indication that the WG did really want to allow relative URIs
Yes.
> or does "URI reference" have a different meaning in the namespaces
> specification?
No.
> Also, this doesn't seem to be coherent either with WXS' definition of
> anyURI
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-2-20010502/#anyURI that says:
>
> "anyURI represents a Uniform Resource Identifier Reference (URI). An
> anyURI value can be absolute or relative..."
What's the problem here -- is it the use of '(URI)' -- I guess this
should have been (URI reference).
> If the W3C has another definition of what are URIs and URI references
> than the IETF
It doesn't.
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
Half-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
|
