W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2003

RE: 2.3 URI Ambiguity

From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:38:39 -0600
Message-ID: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9EFE2@hq1.pcmail.ingr.com>
To: 'Mark Baker' <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org

You are there.  The specifications don't say and they 
shouldn't say.  A URI identifies a single resource 
and if one can't decide when something is or is 
not a resource:

1.  Don't use a URI to identify whatever it is.
2.  If it is a resource, use a unique URI.
3.  If a URI is used ambiguously, the web 
    architecture is silent about the means of resolution.

It is that simple.  If it isn't, then the rule 
cannot be applied reliably and the house of cards 
creaks.  It doesn't ever quite fall because we 
hold it up with diligence.  No issue.  Perfectly 
consistent because resolutely undefined.


From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org]

On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 02:07:28PM -0600, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> Your parents aren't resources on the web.
> That is precisely the confusion.

Sorry, I'm not going there.  8-)

My statement is perfectly consistent with all of the specifications
which have anything to say about what a resource is.

Received on Tuesday, 2 December 2003 16:38:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:40 UTC