Question
In N-Quads 1.2 and N-Triples 1.2, the wording for IRIs was changed from 'absolute IRI' to 'resolved IRI': https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf12-n-triples/#sec-iri
Clicking on the word 'resolved' in either specification opens the following section in RFC 3986: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986/#section-5 That section is about URI resolution, but does not -- strictly speaking -- define what an absolute URI/IRI is.
Am I correct to infer that the intended definitio nof a 'resolved IRI' is: "The URI/IRI that results from resolving the given (possibly relative) URI/IRI against an (implicitly or explicitly given) base URI?"
And does this imply that example [1] is legal in N-Triples 1.2, but is illegal in N-Triples 1.1? If retrieved from https://example.com/test.nt, line [1] and [2] denote the same triple.
[1] <aap><noot><mies>.
[2] <https://example.com/aap><https://example.com/noot><https://example.com/mies>.
If not, can the correct definition of 'resolved IRI' be given for clarification?
Question
In N-Quads 1.2 and N-Triples 1.2, the wording for IRIs was changed from 'absolute IRI' to 'resolved IRI': https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf12-n-triples/#sec-iri
Clicking on the word 'resolved' in either specification opens the following section in RFC 3986: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986/#section-5 That section is about URI resolution, but does not -- strictly speaking -- define what an absolute URI/IRI is.
Am I correct to infer that the intended definitio nof a 'resolved IRI' is: "The URI/IRI that results from resolving the given (possibly relative) URI/IRI against an (implicitly or explicitly given) base URI?"
And does this imply that example [1] is legal in N-Triples 1.2, but is illegal in N-Triples 1.1? If retrieved from https://example.com/test.nt, line [1] and [2] denote the same triple.
If not, can the correct definition of 'resolved IRI' be given for clarification?