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

Re: URIs are simply names was: Re:"Abstract"URIs

• To: XML DEV <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re:"Abstract"URIs
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 02:52:55 -0800
• References: <B896D80E.ED61%patrick.stickler@n...> <3C714063.45D906BD@a...>

Patrick Stickler wrote:
>
>...
>
> With all due respect, Paul, this is a pretty weak argument.
>
> "They work for me, for what I do, so they must work for you, too"
 
Rather: "they work for me and if you have practical problems you'll have
to explain them to me because I don't see them."
 
> Those who are concerned with dissemination of content for display
> in browsers don't see the problems with URIs. Those who want to
> use URIs to model knowledge see them all to well.
 
I'm sure this is true. I was proceeding more from Simon's point of view
which I perceive to be the opposite of yours. He sees the conceptual
generalization from URLs to URIs to be a problem. I think it is healthy
and productive to think of "those strings" as identifiers, not
locations, in part because it allows knowledge modeling.
 
 Paul Prescod

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: URIs are simply names was:Re:"Abstract"URIs
    • From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@n...>

• References:
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re:"Abstract"URIs
    • From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Traditional RPC
• Next by Date: Re: Traditional RPC
• Previous by thread: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re:"Abstract"URIs
• Next by thread: Re: URIs are simply names was:Re:"Abstract"URIs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread