- From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 14:37:11 -0400 ()
- To: "David G. Durand" <dgd@cs.bu.edu>
- cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>, Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>, Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>, timbl@w3.org, fielding@ics.uci.edu, Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no, uri@bunyip.com, lassila@w3.org, swick@w3.org, jeanpa@microsoft.com, cmsmcq@uic.edu, lehors@w3.org, ij@w3.org, slein@wrc.xerox.com, jdavis@parc.xerox.com
On Fri, 24 Oct 1997, David G. Durand wrote: > Location independence is really useful (demonstrated fact). The > counter-argument that location independent names can break is very > weak given that location dependent identifiers also break > regularly. But there is nothing to stop regular URLs being used as location independent identifiers. This is just a matter of how you use the URLs, e.g. you could use a directory service to find a copy without caring as to where the copy is held. Regards, -- Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett phone: +44 122 578 2984 (or 2521) +44 385 320 444 (gsm mobile) World Wide Web Consortium (on assignment from HP Labs)
Received on Saturday, 25 October 1997 14:40:08 UTC