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

RE: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce wi

• To: 'Tim Bray' <tbray@t...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce with James Clark)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 08:59:47 -0500

Obtuse.  The real world works as I have described it.  The 
fantasy world of URIs as unique ids of unique resources 
doesn't work as long as their is an HTTP in the morph and 
the syntax for naming and resolution are identical.

It is always derferenceable. What you get back is not 
predictable.   That is why it fails the test of being 
a unique identifier or a unique item.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@t...]

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> A URzed is always dereferenceable.  If we accept that, then

We don't.  There is no supporting de jure evidence for this proposition, 
and many counterexamples that one encounters daily.  Thus the rest of 
your arguments are uninteresting until they find some base in the real 
world.  I suspect I may agree with the conclusion you're heading 
towards, but you'll have to find another way to get there. -Tim

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa cewith James Clark)
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• Prev by Date: RE: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce with James Clark)
• Next by Date: Re: version numbers and infosets
• Previous by thread: Re: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pace with James Clark)
• Next by thread: Re: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa cewith James Clark)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread