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

Re: section 1, intro, for review

From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 16:43:09 -0800
Message-ID: <3C96899D.BBAAC679@prescod.net>
To: www-tag@w3.org
David Orchard wrote:
> 
> ....
> 
> So I find it not suprising at all that changing one variable (adding
> extensible data interchange models via XML) means a change to a different
> variable (adding different information models to a single information
> model).  

What do you mean by different information models? From my point of view,
the Web has one fundamental universal feature and that is the URI. The
question that faces us, in my opinion, is whether there should be
alternate addresing models. For instance if I go to XMethods, I note
that every web service there has its own addressing model.

The ATM location database accepts zip codes and produces ATM locations.
None of its ATM locations are universally addressable because they don't
have URIs. 

Kazoo accepts phone numbers and produces XML person records. None of its
person records are universally addressable because they don't have URIs.

GeoPinpoint accepts IP addresses and returns locations. None of its
results are ...

(geez, ignore REST for a second, what ever happened to privacy!)

Now can anyone make a case that these applications are richer or better
because they invented proprietary address spaces? Under what
circumstances is a proprietary address space an advantage?

 Paul Prescod
Received on Monday, 18 March 2002 19:46:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:05 GMT