W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > October 2003

Re: uri, urn and info

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 09:39:49 +0300
To: <uri@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BBB2C665.2A48%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>

From : Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress < rden@loc.gov >
Date : Fri, 10 Oct 2003 08:59:47 -0400
Message-ID : <03a301c38f2e$626d1750$849c938c@lib.loc.gov>
To : < uri@w3.org >
From: "Patrick Stickler" < patrick.stickler@nokia.com >
> If http: URIs are used from the start, there is no immediate requirement
> to provide dereferencability, but if/when the need/desire arises,
> it's trivial to provide it.

I think that's a weak argument. If/when the need/desire arises, it's trivial
to define an http uri. Nobody has said that an info identifier is going to
be unique.
--Ray 

    Now hold on. One of the chief reasons given for creating
    this new URI scheme was that there was a significant need
    for *official*, *standardized* URI denotation of particular
    vocabularies -- so that a majority of folks would be using
    the same terms, facilitating interoperability.

    If there is going to be a single "blessed" URI based name
    for some DDC or ISBN identifier, then I'd like to see it
    be an http: URI.

    Yes, there is no restriction on how many URIs might denote
    the same thing (I've pointed that out myself in this very
    thread) but there is much to be gained from an economy of
    identifiers.

    Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2003 02:40:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:32 GMT