Re: Dead (but interesting) topic Re: URI denumerability

Tim Bray wrote,
> So unless you have some other way of getting at it (ratio between 
> circumference and diameter, integral of 1/x, square root of 2) you'll
> never get a name, which means that it just isn't a resource (a thing
> that has identity), so the world-view is kind of consistent.

Maybe it's not a Resource as far as RFC 2396 is concerned, but it 
doesn't follow from that that it's not "a thing with identity" ... a 
lot of math and logic would be, <ahem/>, awkward otherwise. Presumably 
you'd have to deny,

  (Vx)(x = x)

where the quantifier ranges over the reals: most of them are nameless, 
so, if RFC 2396 is to be believed, identity is ... what? Undefined?

> Think of all those poor nameless reals... that's a special kind of
> loneliness. -Tim

Not at all. The nameless things *far* outnumber the named.

Cheers,


Miles