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

Re: URIs harmful

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: URIs harmful
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 19:40:13 -0400
• References: <200207230651.g6N6pU4N017963@c...>

[Mike Brown]

> Thomas B. Passin wrote:
> > It would probably have been better if the W3C had said that, if you want
to
> > have a pure identifier that is not intended to give network access to a
> > resource, then use the w3c-ndi: scheme ("W3C Non-dereferenceable
Identifer")
> > or some such, and to have issued an RFC that specified exactly those
> > semantics.
>
> "Non-dereferenceable identifier" would be an oxymoron, according to some,
> and depending on the definition of dereference, I would agree! :)
>

:-) Could be, Mike, but I bet everyone reading it knows just what I
intended!  Call it what you will, a special scheme for these things could
make sense.

Cheers,

Tom P

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: URIs harmful
    • From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>

• References:
  • Re: URIs harmful
    • From: Mike Brown <mike@s...>

• Prev by Date: Hiring in NYC? (I'm asking, not offering)
• Next by Date: Re: version numbers and infosets
• Previous by thread: Re: URIs harmful
• Next by thread: RE: URIs harmful
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread