W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > December 1999

RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-binding-protocol-02.txt (fwd)

From: Didier PH Martin <martind@netfolder.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:09:32 -0500
To: "Dan Brickley" <Daniel.Brickley@bristol.ac.uk>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NBBBJPGDLPIHJGEHAKBACEHAEKAA.martind@netfolder.com>
Hi Dan,

Dan said:
On the RDF/WebDAV front, this new draft is interesting as it relates to
some of the issues we've discussed w.r.t. 'anonymous' nodes and the
relationship between resource identifiers (URIs) and the resources
themselves.  I'd really like to see this nailed down explicitly for
RDF: is RDF happy with the notion that one single resource can have
multiple URI names bound to it?

Didier reply:
Often by URI we mean in fact URL.

A URN can points to several URLs and therefore if an object is refered by a
URN then it potentially refers to several URLs. When we refer to an object
by a URN we refer to its name not its location. Its name (URN) can then be
translated (with the proper DNS record) into several locations (URL).

This said, are you proposing that because URNs are not very popular (even if
they can actually be resolved with the right DNS query) and that, in fact,
people seems to stick to URLs. Thus maybe we then speak simply of URLs
instead of URIs.

Cheers
Didier PH Martin
----------------------------------------------
Email: martind@netfolder.com
Conferences: Web New York (http://www.mfweb.com)
Book to come soon: XML Pro published by Wrox Press
Products: http://www.netfolder.com
Received on Thursday, 23 December 1999 13:09:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:42 GMT