- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 20:30:05 +0100
- To: Kenley Lamaute <kenleyl@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Dave Caroline <dave.thearchivist@gmail.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 28 Jul 2012, at 20:17, Kenley Lamaute <kenleyl@microsoft.com> wrote: > The same logic would hold true for any unique identifier. Its content; It can be republished by a new owner (with appropriate uuid) or deleted... Either is okay. +1 This desire for unbreakable identifiers (URNs etc.) is understandable, but also it is a 20+ year perma-thread. Meanwhile, the http-URI Web is mostly working fine, for billions of documents and users. Broken links are a nuisance that we can work around... Dan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Caroline [mailto:dave.thearchivist@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2012 4:37 AM > To: Kenley Lamaute > Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org > Subject: Re: currentModel attribute for /Product > > I can see a glaring hole in the URI as a unique identifier > > If large corp creates a product and defines the uri as > http:uri.largecorp.com/steamenginetype1 > > Sells a million but goes bust a while later what of the id we now have a dead link breaking the chain or worse decides it is an obsolete product and deletes all mention of it. > or largecorp becomes a subsidiary of fatcorp who redefines all id's in its own image as they often do. > > > Dave Caroline > > > > > >
Received on Saturday, 28 July 2012 19:30:52 UTC