Keep in mind that draft is only going to work if it accommodates reality. It is too late to move to a URI only relation types world.
EHL
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Cantor [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 12:40 PM
> To: 'Will Norris'; 'XRI TC'
> Subject: RE: [xri] Version Control Commit by blade
>
> > There is: http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/
> >
> >
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-
> 06#section-4.1
>
> I'm ok with that. I haven't seen it done, but it seems reasonable to
> say
> "MUST either be an absolute URI or a relative URI with respect to the
> base
> URI "http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/".
>
> I just want a consistent semantic if it's going to be expressed as a
> URI.
>
> I don't *agree* particularly with using short names like this, it's a
> false
> optimization that people just need to get over, but as long as it's
> unambiguous, seems ok. From reading that draft, it says, as I think
> Eran
> said, that using the full URI with those relation types is a SHOULD
> NOT, so
> we obviously shouldn't do it.
>
> -- Scott
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
