[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: Unresolvable URIs (in Atom link relations)
Davis_Cornelia@emc.com wrote: > Hi Julian, all, > > > > In your weekend post you make the point that > > > > “ it also needs to be clear > > that we have a URI for the link target. (Note that that URI doesn't > > necessarily need to be resolvable.)” I pointed out because you mentioned URI + fragment identifiers, but of course it's true for non-resolvable URIs as well. > While I, of course, understand that URIs are not URLs (that is, they > needn’t be resolvable), and that the value of an Atom link relation href > is an URI (really an IRI), does the description of, for example, the > “service” relation given here > (http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml) > > ‘rel="service" indicates a URI that can be used to *retrieve* an Atom > Publishing Protocol Service Document as defined by RFC 5023.’ (emphasis > added by me) > > not add the requirement of resolvability to these URIs? This is one > specific example, and the Atom specs do similar things – talk about URIs > used as addresses. Yes, that's true. So yes, a link relation can be defined in a away so that only resolvable URIs make sense as targets. > I understand that there will be uses of atom link relations where the > URI is NOT resolvable, for example, a URI value that represents me, and > that there is always the possibility that at any instance in time, a URL > may be not be resolvable. The question is whether we can spec relations > where the href value really is a URL? I would think so. BR, Julian PS: cc'ing Mark Nottingham, maybe he's got more advice. -- <green/>bytes GmbH, Hafenweg 16, D-48155 Münster, Germany Amtsgericht Münster: HRB5782
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]