W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2005

Re: [Fwd: simple case of IRIs for Components in WSDL 2.0] (abstractComponentRefs-37 )

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:32:10 +0100
Message-Id: <68E1330F-B362-42FC-8ADD-B7279C8D2F31@w3.org>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, W3C TAG <www-tag@w3.org>
To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com


On Sep 17, 2005, at 15:02, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:


>
> Dan Connolly wrote:
>
>
>
>> For one thing, because it's easier: you just stick one file in the
>> right place, at 2005/08/sparql-protocol-query , and it grounds
>> all the terms in the namespace.
>>
>>
>
> Oh, I realize I wasn't clear.  I wasn't asking what advantages an
> individual might find in chosing # vs. /, which is what I think you're
> explaining.  I was asking whether there were deep architectural  
> reasons
> why the TAG would discourage this usage of / if someone should find it
> useful.  For one thing, the # identifiers really aren't well grounded
> unless there's a document/representation, I think.  The / forms  
> seem to
> have clearer grounding in the URI space even before someone deploys  
> actual
> representations (though we all agree that deploying retrievable
> representations is desirable in any case.)
>
>

Er... without any deployed representations what does / have over #?

And when you deploy stuff, the # builds on very basic web architecture
which has been tested for ages and the / builds on HTML redirects  
which have
just been dreamed up by the TAG and not seriously deployed at all yet
as far as I know.

Tim

>
> Noah
>
Received on Tuesday, 20 September 2005 14:32:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:36 GMT