W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > August 2007

Re: identifier to use

From: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 19:23:47 +0200
Message-ID: <46CDC2A3.3030903@isb-sib.ch>
To: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>
CC: Hilmar Lapp <hlapp@duke.edu>, public-semweb-lifesci hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>

Phillip Lord wrote:
> I don't understand the desire to implement everything using HTTP.

Likewise, I don't understand the desire to implement everything using 
anything but HTTP :-) If there is an existing system that is (incredibly) 
widely adopted and that can be built upon, surely that's the way to go?


> Why call
> lots of things, which are actually several protocols by a name which suggests
> that they are all one. How to distinguish between an HTTP URI which allows you
> to do location independent, two step resolution and one which doesn't. Well,
> one solution would be, perhaps, to call it something different, say, perhaps,
> LSID? 

You could have the concept of LS HTTP URIs that follow certain conventions, 
may be useful for some, but I don't quite see the problem with the fact 
that you will be able to resolve some HTTP URIs, but not others: The only 
way to know whether a URI can be resolved or not, in the end, is to try; 
some systems just seem to make doing so harder...
Received on Thursday, 23 August 2007 17:24:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:00:49 GMT