W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2002

RE: httpRange-14 , what's the problem

From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 14:06:14 -0500
Message-ID: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B68B@HQ5>
To: "'Miles Sabin'" <miles@milessabin.com>, www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>

There is nothing wrong with an ambiguous identifier 
unless one doesn't realize that it isn't a symbol 
or a sign; it is an index.  Fielding's clock 
and even the weather, are good examples of an indexed 
resources.

URIs, URNs, and URLs are really URSs.  Until one 
knows the operation to be performed, one can't conclude 
which and as long as they are persistent, doesn't 
need to.  So they are ambiguous up to the point of practice. 

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Miles Sabin [mailto:miles@milessabin.com]

Joshua Allen wrote,
> C. Some people claim that identity is inherently ambiguous, and
> therefore URIs are meaningless to begin with.  Since a URI doesn't
> *really* identify anything, it doesn't matter what scheme you use. 
> This is the perversion of "minimally constraining".

That's not quite right if that's meant to be a characterization of my 
position.

All I claim is that some ident*ifiers* are in practice used ambiguously. 
Received on Wednesday, 17 July 2002 15:06:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:09 GMT