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

RE: URN vs URL

• To: 'Chiusano Joseph' <chiusano_joseph@b...>
• Subject: RE: URN vs URL
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 16:08:12 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

If you recommended that, you are obligated to:

1.  Answer all bug reports from any and all users 
of documents with the http-empowered names 
for which no representations are retrieved (by intent)

2.  Write the section of the Government recommendations 
that explains why it is a good idea to use http-empowered 
names in cases where no representation will ever be 
retrieved by dereferencing because the intent of the 
author wasn't clearly expressed (by omission).

3. Answering all future questions and resolving all future 
permathreads on the futility of using http-empowered 
names in cases where the author can't make up their 
mind about what they intend (by confusion).

4.  Donate your current and all future income to paying 
off the increased costs of using http-empowered names 
for any of the above because someone a few years ago 
said it was a sin to use a non-http-dereferencable 
name on the world wide web.  If you can find them 
at the W3C, you might inveigle them to share your pain.

Or just do as RDF does and make a hash of it.

;-)

len

From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@b...]

As a sidenote, I recommended that this document be updated to also
include URL formats for namespace identifiers. Oh, which reminds me: I
need to check on its status...

• Prev by Date: Re: URN vs URL
• Next by Date: RE: URN vs URL
• Previous by thread: URN vs URL
• Next by thread: RE: URN vs URL
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread