> Hi Patrick: > >> I think that the generalization of what essentially was a content >> access mechanism into an mechanism for denoting "secondary resources" >> is a failed experiment that will, as the web and SW evolves, offer >> less and less utility. >> > > Respectfully, must beg to disagree. This notion of limiting fragment > identifiers to content access only is not how URIs are actually being > used in practice - I can assure you of that. I have seen clear > examples (not mine, mind) in which URIs are being implemented in > production use cases to identify 'secondary' resources wrt 'primary' > resources. I would suggest that 2396bis has it about right. If the web > is to be restricted to a world of representations alone then it will > be sorely tested as a global information space. > > (The purpose of URIs, I would have thought, is not to provide a > document retrieval mechanism necessarily but to provide node points > for articulating a common information space.) > > Cheers, > > Tony > > > Tony Hammond > > mail: tony@tonyhammond.net > home: +44-(0)20-7704-1499 > cell: +44-(0)7969-830-601 >Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2004 14:08:10 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 October 2007 06:11:45 GMT