- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:59:08 +0000
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 9 Nov 2011, at 23:33, Jeremy Carroll wrote: >> [[ >> PROPOSAL: Resolve ISSUE-37 and ISSUE-69 by deleting the section "Fragment Identifiers" from RDF Concepts >> ]] > > I think we should ask Graham Klyne for his opinion on this. Richard seems to have done a good job in researching the rationale ... Graham owned this section. After sleeping over this I think I changed my mind. I would like to keep the section in some form. The statement it ought to make is: “In media types that encode RDF graphs, a fragment #foo identifies whatever is denoted by <base#foo> in the encoded RDF graph. Everything said in RFC 3986 Section 3.5 still applies.” I've re-written the section to say exactly that, albeit in a lot more words, while keeping some phrasing from the old text: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#section-fragID It's pretty long because it recaps some bits of RFC 3986 in order to provide context. I guess this resolves ISSUE-37 and ISSUE-69 in a non-controversial way. I will mark both issues as pending review. Best, Richard
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 12:00:02 UTC