On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 00:24 -0500, Andrei SAMBRA wrote: > You need to understand that in this case, adding a few constraints > helps us to achieve this goal. This matter is not about personal > preferences, but about valid reasons why several decisions were taken, > decisions which are above all about scalability/performance. > hi andrei, the above and all arguments in favour of #-uris very strongly remind me of a base-class, if you allow me this analogy from a coder's perspective, where we are debating things that should be part of a spec (vulgo interface). please also note once and for all : i'm -1 on putting one kind of uri (hash or no hash) into the spec as long as there are no technical or logical reasons that exclude one or the other. i do not consider performance or "cannot implement 303" a technical reason. ;-) please also note that i'm not payed by anyone for the above commitment wkr turnguard -- | Jürgen Jakobitsch, | Software Developer | Semantic Web Company GmbH | Mariahilfer Straße 70 / Neubaugasse 1, Top 8 | A - 1070 Wien, Austria | Mob +43 676 62 12 710 | Fax +43.1.402 12 35 - 22 COMPANY INFORMATION | web : http://www.semantic-web.at/ | foaf : http://company.semantic-web.at/person/juergen_jakobitsch PERSONAL INFORMATION | web : http://www.turnguard.com | foaf : http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard | g+ : https://plus.google.com/111233759991616358206/posts | skype : jakobitsch-punkt | xmlns:tg = "http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard#"
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2012 13:20:07 UTC