Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs
"Simon St.Laurent" wrote: > > On Sat, 2002-02-16 at 11:19, Paul Prescod wrote: > > You're right that it is an uphill battle arguing for fundamental > > architectural change in the most successful information system in > > history. > > URLs are genuinely successful. The scheme: approach was a good idea. > However, I don't think any strong case can be made that URIs are genuine > contributors to the success of that information system, except to the > extent that they overlap with URLs - and, in many ways, damage the > usefulness of URLs. I don't really distinguish between URIs and URLs for two reasons: 1. I don't want to get into a philisophical debate on the distinction. 2. Almost all of the URIs I see are actually URLs. When I say that URIs are great I don't mean as opposed to URLs, I mean including URLs. I use the terms as described here: URI Uniform Resource Identifier. The generic set of all names/addresses that are short strings that refer to resources. URL Uniform Resource Locator. An informal term (no longer used in technical specifications) associated with popular URI schemes: http, ftp, mailto, etc. People SHOULD treat URLs (even HTTP) ones more like *identifiers* rather than *locators* in the sense that you should think of the identifier as being welded to the resource and not just a convenient way of finding it on the network. * http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI Paul Prescod
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format