29 messages in org.oasis-open.lists.xriRe: [xri] Property, rel comparison| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Eran Hammer-Lahav | Jan 25, 2010 9:04 am | |
| Eran Hammer-Lahav | Jan 25, 2010 9:06 am | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 25, 2010 9:16 am | |
| Eran Hammer-Lahav | Jan 25, 2010 9:20 am | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 25, 2010 9:37 am | |
| Breno de Medeiros | Jan 25, 2010 9:44 am | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 25, 2010 10:24 am | |
| Drummond Reed | Jan 26, 2010 12:08 am | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 26, 2010 6:59 am | |
| Drummond Reed | Jan 26, 2010 7:31 am | |
| Breno de Medeiros | Jan 26, 2010 8:31 am | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 26, 2010 8:38 am | |
| Breno de Medeiros | Jan 26, 2010 8:57 am | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 26, 2010 9:00 am | |
| Breno de Medeiros | Jan 26, 2010 9:06 am | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 26, 2010 9:13 am | |
| Breno de Medeiros | Jan 26, 2010 9:19 am | |
| Eran Hammer-Lahav | Jan 26, 2010 9:20 am | |
| Eran Hammer-Lahav | Jan 26, 2010 9:24 am | |
| Breno de Medeiros | Jan 26, 2010 9:29 am | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 26, 2010 9:38 am | |
| Breno de Medeiros | Jan 26, 2010 9:42 am | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 26, 2010 10:02 am | |
| Eran Hammer-Lahav | Jan 26, 2010 12:26 pm | |
| Eran Hammer-Lahav | Jan 26, 2010 12:32 pm | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 26, 2010 12:44 pm | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 26, 2010 12:46 pm | |
| Breno de Medeiros | Jan 26, 2010 1:02 pm | |
| Scott Cantor | Jan 26, 2010 1:47 pm |
| Subject: | Re: [xri] Property, rel comparison | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Eran Hammer-Lahav (er...@hueniverse.com) | |
| Date: | Jan 26, 2010 12:26:58 pm | |
| List: | org.oasis-open.lists.xri | |
On 1/26/10 10:02 AM, "Scott Cantor" <cant...@osu.edu> wrote:
Breno de Medeiros wrote on 2010-01-26:
If it's application-specific, then it's not scheme-specific either, it's just application-specific.
Do we really need this level of generality?
I was trying to "interpret" Eran's comments in a precise way, since the point here is to get the spec done. He said application-specific and that to me is not the same as a scheme-specific (unless by application we mean "URI application").
I don't have a strong view on application-specific vs scheme-specific for subjects. At the end, its up to the client to figure out what to make out of the subject information. So far we have only focused on extracting the 'host' component in a scheme-specific fashion, but we didn't touch on what to do about URI normalization.
I think saying that the <Subject> URI identifies a resource per 3986 is enough. That implies all the necessary processing and comparison rules. But I am happy to use another language. The point I was trying to make on the Subject URI was that it was *not* a string comparison but a URI comparison. I guess that just means scheme-specific URI comparison.
According to Eran, these are not URIs, but XML namespaces in URI format.
No, they're similar to URIs that identify XML namespaces in that they're solely identifiers, need not resolve, and can follow the same (trivial) comparison rules. But no, these are not actually XML namespaces and we wouldn't reference them as such.
I was not suggesting we call them XML namespaces, just that we use these URI-formatted strings in a similar fashion. There are not resource identifiers, they are strings with a required format.
EHL
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php