W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > January 2002

Re: tags

From: Tim Kindberg <timothy@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:13:37 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.1.20020125074940.03e80620@hplex1.hpl.hp.com>
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, ext Tim Kindberg <timothy@hpl.hp.com>, URN <urn-ietf@lists.netsol.com>, URI <uri@w3.org>
At 12:25 PM 1/25/02 +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote:

>Names may only be valid or interpretable within a given context, but
>I do not agree that the same name in different contexts can correspond
>to different "things".

So /etc/passwd is guaranteed to be the same file on all UNIX computers? So 
we have to give up the independence of bindings of names like 192.168.0.*?

If you want the Web to be different then you have to define the property of 
the Web that makes it so.

I believe that we do need a way of getting a default binding -- a mechanism 
whereby software can automatically get the address of the resource bound by 
the name's minting authority. But the software that I have as my client 
should equally be capable of using alternative naming contexts to reach 
alternative resources. Let's have a market of naming contexts just as we 
have a market of web sites. I shouldn't have to have new software to take 
advantage of a new naming context. E.g. imagine that a film has a 
globally/temporally unique name; now imagine all the sites/naming-contexts 
you might want to get resources from, using that same identifier. Even if 
you insist on saying that those other resources are likely to be 'metadata' 
about the minting authority's resource, they're still separately managed 
resources.

Tim.


Tim Kindberg

mobile systems and services lab  hewlett-packard laboratories
1501 page mill road, ms 1u-17
palo alto
ca 94304-1126
usa

www.champignon.net/TimKindberg/
timothy@hpl.hp.com
voice +1 650 857 5609
fax +1 650 857 2358
Received on Friday, 25 January 2002 11:06:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:30 GMT