Fwd: backronym proposal: Universal Resource Linker

So - I'm serious. The term 'URI' has never really worked as something
most Web users encounter and understand.

For RDF, SemWeb and linked data efforts, this is a problem as our data
model is built around URIs.

If 'URL' can be brought back from limbo as a credible technical term,
and rebranded around the concept of 'linkage', I think it'll go a long
way towards explaining what we're up to with RDF.

Thoughts?

Dan


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:52 AM
Subject: backronym proposal: Universal Resource Linker
To: uri@w3.org
Cc: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>


I'll keep this short. The official term for Web identifiers, URI,
isn't widely known or understood. The I18N-friendly variant IRI
confuses many (are we all supposed to migrate to use it; or just in
our specs?), while the most widely used, understood and (for many)
easiest to pronounce, 'URL' (for Uniform Resource Locator) has been
relegated to 'archaic form' status. At the slightest provocation this
community dissapears down the rathole of URI-versus-URN, and until
this all settles down we are left with an uncomfortable disconnect
between how those in-the-know talk about Web identifiers, and those
many others who merely use it.

As of yesterday, I've been asked "but what is a URI?" one too many
times. I propose a simple-minded fix: restore 'URL' as the most
general term for Web identifiers, and re-interpret 'URL' as "Universal
Resource Linker". Most people won't care, but if they investigate,
they'll find out about the re-naming. This approach avoids URN vs URI
kinds of distinction, scores 2 out of 3 for use of intelligible words,
and is equally appropriate to classic browser/HTML, SemWeb and other
technical uses. What's not to like? The Web is all about links, and
urls are how we make them...

cheers,

Dan

Received on Sunday, 18 April 2010 10:18:52 UTC