[sc34wg3] CTM draft dtd. 2007-09-09 - Proposal for IRIs

[Lars Heuer]

Hi all,

I like to propose that CTM allows to embed IRIs within "angle
brackets": < >

Reasons:
- One goal was, that CTM can be used within examples inside
  e-mails, but a bunch of e-mail clients do not recognize IRIs and break
  them. If a client breaks the IRIs, a user cannot copy and paste the
  CTM fragment easily: the user may have to fix the IRIs before it is
  a valid CTM-fragment
- The <> syntax would be conform to the TMQL syntax, which allows IRIs
  within angle brackets and without angle brackets
- CTM would follow RFC 3986 which recommends the <> syntax
  (c.f. <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#appendix-C>)
- <> syntax is very common (c.f. miscellaneous RDF syntaxes)
- No need to insert whitespaces at several places where the following
  character can be interpreted as part of the IRI
  (i.e. see the note here:
  <http://www.jtc1sc34.org/repository/0905.htm#sec-assoc>)

IMO CTM should allow *both* syntaxes: Either an IRI within angle
brackets or without angle brackets (as TMQL does).

Best regards,
Lars
-- 
http://www.semagia.com