- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 11:39:15 -0400
- To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- cc: John Pybus <john@pybus.org>, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
> Actually I think that URL has entered the mainstream - if I use URI to
> non-tech people, they look puzzled, and ask if I mean URL.
> And as for http://=20
> Back in 2001 the ITU dropped it for their standards (ITU-T Recommendation
> E.123) - http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-E.123-200102-I/en
> If a conservative body like that thought it was not good, don't know why
> anyone has been using it the last 10 years.
>
> So my guess is that we are stuck with "web address" and URL, and have ot
> live with that.
Agreed. And the only reason I know of to use the term "URI" outside of
a spec is to be overly pedantic or to identify yourself as a Web
Architecture "expert" of some sort. That's actually a valuable social
purpose, but we shouldn't kid ourselves that there's an important
technical distinction. And if we get everyone using the term "URI",
then we'll need to invent some new jargon. :-)
Meanwhile, of course, many of the important new specs are using "IRI",
which does make a very important technical distinction, but is also best
kept far away from public discourse. I suggest sticking with "Web
Address" or "URL" when talking to people who don't already know the
details of httpRange-14 and RFC 3986.
-- Sandro
Received on Thursday, 8 April 2010 15:39:17 UTC