W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-uri@w3.org > September 2000

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-daigle-uri-std-00.txt

From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 14:26:03 -0400
Message-ID: <39B7DDBB.4A60225F@reutershealth.com>
To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>
CC: XML-uri@w3.org
"Simon St.Laurent" wrote:

> It seems, however, that we may have different manifestations based on the
> context within which a URI is used - and no clear picture at all of what
> the resource might actually be.

Absolutely.  Otherwise there would be no point in distinguishing between
the resource and the entity-body at all.

> I'm tired of koans.

Simon, you are in the position of the foolish nominalist who wants to know
where the number five is, or believes that the 5000th Mersenne prime doesn't
exist because nobody has written down its value yet.
 
> Then I suppose Namespaces in XML is foolish for using URI references in a
> fashion that ignores the resource (or fails to define the relationship
> between the namespace and the resource) entirely...

Not at all.

> if (uriOne==uriTwo) {
>    processing
> }
> 
> I'd like a simple baseline definition for what exactly that == is supposed
> to be, and what != would be, without requiring reference to every document
> describing a scheme.

Char by char equality is generally sufficient.

-- 
There is / one art                   || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
no more / no less                    || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things                   || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness                 \\ -- Piet Hein
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2000 14:26:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Tuesday, 12 April 2005 12:17:25 GMT