W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > June 2004

Re: RFC2396bis wording, opinions?

From: John A. Kunze <jak@ucop.edu>
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 19:58:22 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406071934520.21295-100000@dot.ucop.edu>

> --- On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> On Thursday, June 3, 2004, at 10:57  AM, John A. Kunze wrote:
> >
> >    An identifier is an association between a string and a resource.
> >
> > It is a feature, not a bug, that under this definition a URL ceases to
> > be an identifier -- becoming downgraded to a mere string of data --
> > when that server later responds with a 404 Not Found.
> There are a lot of myths about "broken identifiers"....

Yikes, I wrote a gross mis-interpretation of my favorite definition!
Just the opposite of what I've been arguing for years!  At least I
flatly contradicted myself later in that note.  Sorry for my attention

Of course the URL is still an identifier when the server doesn't respond.
It's the association that matters, and there are a million non-web ways
to demonstrate the association.  Roy, thanks for your patient explanation.

Received on Monday, 7 June 2004 22:57:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:07 UTC