Re: Use of "assign" for URI -> resource

On Sep 16, 2004, at 11:03 PM, Larry Masinter wrote:
[...]
> I would be happy to dispense entirely with the notion of
> "ownership", since I think it makes the web architecture
> messy and adds an unnecessary complexity. I'd be happier
> to talk about "capabilities" rather than "ownership", and
> then, just for resources. There are some individuals, groups,
> or technical (why 'social'?) entities that have the capability
> to modify resources, and change the behavior seen when
> resources are contacted or asked for representation.

At first I didn't like this suggestion; the motivation for "social
entity" has been clear to me: to relate web publishing to
traditional publishing, w.r.t. liabilities and such. But then reading 
on...

[...]
> what actually happens here doesn't have much to do with "ownership
> rights" and more to do with "capability to modify resources identified
> by one or more URIs"

Now I begin to see the appeal. I can imagine that might make
things more simple and direct. I'm mulling it over.

-- 
Dan