URIs and resources (Was: AWWW, 20040816 release, sections 1 and 2)

At 15:55 28/09/04 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
>| Section 2.5, Good Practice point:
>|
>| I found the point, as stated, seemed rather vague (specifically:
>| "except as specified by relevant specifications").
>|
>| My suggestion would be turn this around to state something like this:
>| [[
>| The form of URI may indicate how to access a resource, but not about
>| the nature of the resource, except insofar as it is constrained by the
>| access method.
>| ]]
>
>I think the problem is that I could invent and register a scheme that
>did allow additional assertions. The data: scheme, for example, allows
>me to assert that the resource is the URI.

Oops, I think I just made a similar point with respect to the revised URI 
spec!  (i.e. I take your point.)

I still think "except as specified by relevant specifications" is unhelpful 
here;  The vague reference to "relevant specifications" doesn't tell the 
reader where else to look.  I'll take another stab at a revision for your 
consideration:

[[
The form of URI may indicate how to access a resource, but not about
the nature of the resource, except insofar as it may be constrained
by the specification of the particular URI scheme used.
]]

(I think that covers access method dependents.)

#g


------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact