Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Best Practice for URI construction?
 On 12/12/05, Michael Kay <mike@s...> wrote: > > > > I was giving examples of possible results, for any given > > implementation it's should never be ambiguous. Eg; without the query > > parameters it identifies the search screen (perhaps). With the query > > parameters it identifies a single patient (assuming one exists for the > > given parameters). An alternate implementation might be that without > > query parameters the results is a list. > > > > Or where you worried about something else? > > Yes, I'm worried that we're trying to solve the meaning of life the universe > and everything when we clearly lack the intellectual apparatus even to > define the problem. Given that it's tempting to think that URIs can somehow identify everything, and that people tend to think that classes etc. can somehow model everything I can see how you might come to that conclusions. However, no, that was not my intention. I was just trying to add another perspective on the issue of what to put in the query string vs. what to put in the rest of the URI. > > You're right that if we stick to "implementations" the problems are > tractable. I wouldn't say "implementations", I would say "closed systems". > When we do information modelling we ask questions like "what is a flight?", > "if a flight involves a stopover, is that one flight, two flights, or > three?", "if an extra plane is laid on to handle extra demand, is that the > same flight or a different flight?". I know how to tackle these questions > within the confines of a closed system where we can agree the terms and what > we mean by them. A smallish group of people can get together and decide on > precise definitions of the terms they are using within a limited domain of > discourse. Interesting example since I once had to design and build a reservation system for a company that managed airline reservations across multiple business partners. That aside, if the issue is creating URIs, then it seems to me you're usually working on a local or closed system? Personally, I certainly don't expect to be able to reuse a URI from Northwest Airlines on a Delta Web site.... > I simply don't believe that it can be done universally, and what worries me > is that there seem to be people who think it can. What I mean by "flight" > depends on the conversation I am having at the time, and calling it > http://www.saxonica.com/vocabulary/flight instead isn't going to change > that. OK, we could define 120 different URIs to cover the different precise > meanings of the word, but that would only reduce our ability to communicate > with each other. There's a good reason why language is fuzzy and full of > nuance: if it were possible to develop a precise and unambiguous and > unchanging vocabulary we would have evolved one years ago. Deciding that > every distinct concept is going to have a distinct URI is just simplistic: > like tons of bricks or piles of sand, concepts are amorphous and lack clear > identity. Should we talk patents? Sure, but I don't see how any of that relates to my proposal? If anything it's the exact opposite: if you haven't already got a good domain model for a particular concept (ie; if it isn't already well defined within your business), then that particular concept may not be a good candidate for URI construction within your business... -- Peter Hunsberger 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
