CR10 : Refined proposal.

I've been trying to choose which of the proposals to resolve CR10 I
prefer.  And actually I find each of them to be a little bit too full of
code words.

 

For instance, DaveO's definition of "on the Web" does not seem to appear
in the Web Architecture, nor in the URI TAG finding.  Which makes me
want to stay away from that phrasing, as it's liable to mean different
things to different readers, satisfying the issue politically but not
actually communicating clearly enough.

 

Instead I think we should be very explicit about what we're taking
about, and refer directly to the architecture document and use the
terminology that document recommends, and the implications of it on ref
params.

 

I also think there are times, for instance bridging a legacy system to
the internet, where identifying a "resource" using ref params is a
necessary part of the design, and I'd like to state that clearly as
well.

 

So, I'd like to put forward another alternative for resolving CR10. 

 

Proposal 5: The W3C Architecture of the World Wide Web [AoWWW]
recommends as Best Practice [Section 2.1] the use of URIs to identify
resources.  Following this best practice precludes the use of abstract
properties of an EPR other than [destination] to identify resources.  In
certain circumstances, such a use of additional properties may be
convenient, beneficial, or even necessary.  However, when building
systems, the benefits or convenience of identifying a resource using
reference parameters should be carefully weighed against the benefits of
identifying a resource solely by URI.

 

 

<From>Jonathan Marsh</ From>

<ReplyTo>jmarsh@microsoft.com <mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com> </ ReplyTo>

<RelatesTo>http://spaces.msn.com/members/auburnmarshes/
<http://spaces.msn.com/members/auburnmarshes/> </ RelatesTo>