- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 07:58:41 -0500
- To: Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>
- CC: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <4CDD3A01.3090000@openlinksw.com>
On 11/12/10 5:59 AM, Patrick Durusau wrote: > Dave, > > Thanks! > > I was working on a much longer and convoluted response. > > Best to refer to the canonical source and let it go. > > Patrick > > > On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 09:22 +0000, Dave Reynolds wrote: >> On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 12:52 -0500, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >>> All, >>> >>> As the conversation about HTTP responses evolves, I am inclined to >>> believe that most still believe that: >>> >>> 1. URL is equivalent to a URI >>> 2. URI is a fancier term for URI >>> 3. URI is equivalent to URL. >>> >>> I think my opinion on this matter is clear, but I am very interested >>> in the views of anyone that don't agree with the following: >>> >>> 1. URI is an abstraction for Identifiers that work at InterWeb scale >>> 2. A URI can serve as a Name >>> 3. A URI can serve as an Address >>> 4. A Name != Address >>> 5. We locate Data at Addresses >>> 6. Names can be used to provide indirection to Addresses i.e., Names >>> can Resolve to Data. >> Why would this be a matter of opinion? :) >> >> After all RFC3986 et al are Standards Track and have quite clear >> statements on what Identifier connotes in the context of URI. >> Such as: >> >> """ >> Identifier >> >> An identifier embodies the information required to distinguish >> what is being identified from all other things within its scope of >> identification. Our use of the terms "identify" and "identifying" >> refer to this purpose of distinguishing one resource from all >> other resources, regardless of how that purpose is accomplished >> (e.g., by name, address, or context). These terms should not be >> mistaken as an assumption that an identifier defines or embodies >> the identity of what is referenced, though that may be the case >> for some identifiers. Nor should it be assumed that a system >> using URIs will access the resource identified: in many cases, >> URIs are used to denote resources without any intention that they >> be accessed. >> """ >> >> Dave >> >> > > > Patrick / Dave, I am hoping as the responses come in we might pick up something. There is certainly some confusion out there. Note my comments yesterday re. URIs and Referents. I believe this association to be 1:1, but others may not necessarily see it so. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Friday, 12 November 2010 12:59:12 UTC