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

Re: Un-ask the question (was Re: URIs and Nameson th

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Un-ask the question (was Re: URIs and Nameson the Web)
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 07:43:02 -0700
• References: <2YFEZXKEAUO3WMK1THGMK43XA62U0.3d44bf78@MChamp>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.1b) Gecko/20020722

I don't know if the questions can be un-asked, but I think xml-dev is 
wasting quite a bit of time in debating the philosophy without really 
having concrete alternatives in place to focus the debate.  There are a 
bunch of issues conflated here: whether the confusion cost of using URIs 
as names is too high; whether it's harmful to use HTTP URIs to refer to 
anthing but bags of bits; and more.  I give up on each new subject line 
20 or 30 messages in.

If somebody wants to make concrete proposals for changes in the 
infrastructure to address these problems, that would be helpful, and it 
might add to the quality of discourse around here too. -Tim

• Follow-Ups:
  • Scopes trial: Is there a missing piece in the XML puzzle?
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
  • URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Un-ask the question (was Re: URIs and Names on the Web)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Un-ask the question (was Re: URIs and Names on the Web)
• Next by Date: Re: Un-ask the question (was Re: URIs and Names on the Web)
• Previous by thread: Re: Un-ask the question (was Re: URIs and Names on the Web)
• Next by thread: URIs, concrete (was Re: Un-ask the question)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread