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

Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs

• To: XML DEV <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 08:19:23 -0800
• References: <B892A842.E7FE%patrick.stickler@n...> <3C6D4AA4.D436E345@p...> <1013801882.948.34.camel@l...>

"Simon St.Laurent" wrote:
> 
>...
> 
> I keep running into the "Web Architecture" being what it is.  I've yet
> to find out what the criteria for changing the Web Architecture might
> be, or any sign that arguing against these (IMHO, weak) foundations has
> any hope of success.

You're right that it is an uphill battle arguing for fundamental
architectural change in the most successful information system in
history. I think that it could be done if you showed a clear enough flaw
in a clear enough way to sway many people. But I don't see how one would
get consensus on a change while there are so many diverse views on the
issue of URIs and the views are so abstract and hard to falsify.

> However much everyone argues, URIs remain the same unchanging black
> hole.  I see a lot of people heading off to their own corner to build
> systems which use URIs (or ignore them in favor of QNames) however they
> see fit - and less and less chance of making the systems share a common
> understanding.

I agree with that but I'm surprised to hear you say it. I don't really
understand your philosophy of standardization.

> The W3C TAG at least shows some strong signs of interest in keeping
> things brought to them coherent.  I'll be curious to see how they
> interact with the black hole of URIs over time.

URIs are primarily a conversational black hole. In terms of actual
practice they work quite well. I have had few practical problems with
them.

 Paul Prescod

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re:"Abstract"URIs
    • From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@n...>
  • standardization (was Re: URIs are simply names)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs
    • From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@n...>
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: schema & polymorphism - resolving duplicate element definitions
• Next by Date: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs
• Previous by thread: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs
• Next by thread: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread