- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 12:10:19 +0900
- To: Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Le 8 nov. 2006 à 11:59, Renato Iannella a écrit :
> According to the guidelines in [1]:
>
> "Resource metadata that will change SHOULD NOT be encoded in a URI"
> "URIs intended for direct use by people should be easy to
> understand, and should be suggestive of the resource actually named"
>
> My question then, as an example, if you look at the URI in [1] with
> the 2001 date in it - does this mean that the resource in question
> was written on 2001?
That's always a balance between two things:
- an URI spelling is meaningless
- an URI can be readable
Both can work together.
The issue here is that we (humans) convey meaning when we are able to
read it. (people with different languages can't read the same thing)
For example, http://example.org/pain/
is it about suffering (english)?
or is it about bread (french)?
For dated space, is it a way to make identifiers unique or is it a
way to remember it has been written at a certain date.
Documents are often updated on the Web and then even if we are
creating a document and spelling the URI with this date, as soon as
it is updated the "URI spelling" would not convey anymore the same
meaning for humans.
Difficult call as it is based on many things part of our culture,
social behaviour, etc. I do not know if there is anunique solution.
> Cheers... Renato Iannella
> National ICT Australia (NICTA)
>
> [1] <http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/metaDataInURI-31.html>
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Wednesday, 8 November 2006 03:10:46 UTC