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

Re: RFC2396bis wording, opinions?

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 10:07:13 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040528100531.02531618@127.0.0.1>
To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, uri@w3.org, "'Tim Berners-Lee'" <timbl@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>

Larry,

FWIW, I like your proposed text (at "NEW" below).

I think the "slight hint" that danbri refers to in his response is not a 
problem.  Your first clause is quite clear, and in a language-lawyer 
dispute I think would clearly trump any slight implication of what follows.

#g
--

At 01:31 28/05/04 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote:

>My goal is to get RFC2396bis to the state where we can publish
>it without having to solve the difficult problems of
>"what is a resource" and "how do URIs work in the semantic
>web to 'denote' as well as 'identify'".
>
>So far,
>
>* Tim Bray says he finds the existing text 'tolerable'
>   (wouldn't want to change it) but finds my proposed
>   revision 'much more user-friendly and unsuprising'.
>
>* Al Gilman says (of the revision) 'this is good',
>   although he raises a question about "each URI scheme
>   defines", as to whether it sets up a (inappropriate?)
>   requirement. (I thought I'd wait until it was clear we
>   were starting with my revision before answering that).
>
>So, is there anyone who wants to keep on flogging away
>at the OLD text rather than NEW below?
>
>Larry
>--
>http://larry.masinter.net
>
>
>===================================
>
>OLD
>     Resource
>        Anything that has been named or described can be a resource.      ^
>        Familiar examples include an electronic document, an image, a
>        service (e.g., "today's weather report for Los Angeles"), and a
>        collection of other resources. A resource is not necessarily
>        accessible via the Internet; e.g., human beings, corporations, and
>        bound books in a library can also be resources. Likewise, abstract
>        concepts can be resources, such as the operators and operands of a
>        mathematical equation, the types of a relationship (e.g., "parent"
>        or "employee"), or numeric values (e.g., zero, one, and infinity).
>        These things are called resources because they each can be
>        considered a source of supply or support, or an available means,
>        for some system, where such systems may be as diverse as the World
>        Wide Web, a filesystem, an ontological graph, a theorem prover, or
>        some other form of system for the direct or indirect observation
>        and/or manipulation of resources. Note that "supply" is not
>        necessary for a thing to be considered a resource: the ability to
>        simply refer to that thing is often sufficient to support the
>        operation of a given system.
>
>NEW
>    Resource
>        This document doesn't limit the scope of what might be a
>        'resource'; rather, the term 'resource' is used for whatever it
>        is that a Uniform Resource Identifier identifies; each URI scheme
>        defines the range of things that are identified by
>        URIs using that scheme. Commonly, URIs are used to identify
>        Internet accessible objects or services; for example, an electronic
>        document, an image, a service (e.g., "today's weather report for
>        Los Angeles"), a collection of other resources. However,
>        a resource need not be accessible via the Internet; URIs might
>        be used to identify human beings, corporations, bound books in a
>        library, and even abstract concepts.

------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Friday, 28 May 2004 05:24:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:51 UTC