Re: URI etymology

On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sean B. Palmer wrote:

>> In the case of documents defining namespaces, there might be
>> more than one, each with their own RDF descriptions. [...]
>
>Once again, this is no problem, unless you somehow believe that what
>you get back from a namespace upon dereferening it is the "one true
>definition" of the terms in that namespace; utter nonsense.

That is my problem, yes. I seem to think that URIs should only identify a
single resource, as it's a lot more difficult to deal with URIs if they
don't. Plus, it's not in accordance with the original definition of URIs.
The URI-to-resource mapping is designed to be one-to-many, with a preference
towards one-to-one. But I'll stop my pedantry now, before it gets ot of
hand. ;)

Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:decoy@iki.fi, gsm: +358-50-5756111
student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front