Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Tim Bray scripsit: > (a) have a built-in way to disambiguate between what the resource "is" > and what it's "about" > (b) use different names. > > I prefer (b), and would encourage people to use something like > http://www.heritage.org/Shakespeare for the person and the URI above for > the picture. The trick with (b) is that you are then impaled on this dilemma: (b1) Dereferencing "http://www.heritage.org/Shakespeare" returns something, (b2) Dereferencing "http://www.heritage.org/Shakespeare" returns nothing. With (b1) you now have yet another document and have to bifurcate again; with (b2) you get a lot of surprised people who dereference an http: URL and get nothing, just like with namespaces. Given this choice, I like (a) better. -- If you understand, John Cowan things are just as they are; http://www.ccil.org/~cowan if you do not understand, http://www.reutershealth.com things are just as they are. jcowan@r...
|
