[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: URI intents? (was: RDDL: Negotiate out the Noise)

• To: "Jeff Lowery" <jlowery@s...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: URI intents? (was: RDDL: Negotiate out the Noise)
• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@m...>
• Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 16:21:51 -0500
• References: <3549BAFD79A7D411A1CF00508B62B5BC0124BA04@e...>

Jeff Lowery wrote:

>
> Should URI's be extended to include intent? I realize this opens its own
can
> of worms, but I'm see worms already... maybe this can is more tractable.
At
> least an URI that is used outside of its intent could be clearly called
evil
> usage. URIs with multiple intents would have to be spelled out using the
> same base URI identifier, redeclared for each intent.

Ok, so let's describe the intent of how a resource is to be used, let's call
that a "purpose" and sometimes different systems will need different forms
of a resource, let's call that a "nature". So if we label a resource, by
"nature" and "purpose", we will have a mechanism where a system can pick a
resource according to what it needs to do with it.

>
> Is that to far whacked out an idea? Perhaps my own intent is unclear...
>

I think it would work.

Jonathan

• References:
  • RE: URI intents? (was: RDDL: Negotiate out the Noise)
    • From: Jeff Lowery <jlowery@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: URI intents? (was: RDDL: Negotiate out the Noise)
• Next by Date: RE: URI intents? (was: RDDL: Negotiate out the Noise)
• Previous by thread: RE: URI intents? (was: RDDL: Negotiate out the Noise)
• Next by thread: RE: URI intents? (was: RDDL: Negotiate out the Noise)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread