Joshua Allen wrote: > "If two people independently use the same URI as an identifier, they > should be able to have a reasonable degree of confidence that they are > identifying the same resource. > > People should not be required to parse, dereference, or otherwise > acquire any *additional* disambiguating information to provide this > basic guarantee. > > Resource naming practices should be considered carefully, and people are > strongly discouraged from naming resources in a manner that > unnecessarily weakens this guarantee." The intent seems good, but how on earth do you build this confidence? By relying on the human-language semantics of the opaque part of the URI? Does this scale to very large datasets? Are you asking people to believe that a URI represents what a reasonable person would parse out by reading it? Hmm... I'd be way more comfortable with a trusted provider of RDF assertions giving me lengthy-as-necessary descriptions of what any URI points to, even if it is http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0679734570/qid=1027980804/sr=8-3/ref=sr_8_3/104-5660234-7322307 or the like. -TimReceived on Monday, 29 July 2002 18:17:16 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 September 2007 13:52:36 GMT