Re: WebID definitions and specs: conceptual vs functional

On 22 Mar 2013, at 18:15, Jürgen Jakobitsch <j.jakobitsch@semantic-web.at> wrote:

> 
>>   Axiom: Opacity of URIs
>> 
>>   The only thing you can use an identifier for is to refer to 
>>   an object. When you are not dereferencing, you should not 
>>   look at the contents of the URI string to gain other 
>>   information.
>> 
>> In other words -- whether it contains a hash or not; whether
>> its scheme is http or spdy or lmnop; whether it's short or long,
>> human comprehensible or pure gibberish -- all of this must be 
>> ignored *except* when *actually dereferencing,* which is not 
>> conceptual, but functional.
>> 
> 
> 
> intersting... i wrote about something like this, but has been deleted
> from argument list :
> 
> (the now zombie-page)
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/wiki/index.php?title=WebID_Definition/hash&oldid=481

Do you think this would have changed the consensus?


Henry

> 
> wkr turnguard
> 
> -- 
> | Jürgen Jakobitsch, 
> | Software Developer
> | Semantic Web Company GmbH
> | Mariahilfer Straße 70 / Neubaugasse 1, Top 8
> | A - 1070 Wien, Austria
> | Mob +43 676 62 12 710 | Fax +43.1.402 12 35 - 22
> 
> COMPANY INFORMATION
> | web       : http://www.semantic-web.at/
> | foaf      : http://company.semantic-web.at/person/juergen_jakobitsch
> PERSONAL INFORMATION
> | web       : http://www.turnguard.com
> | foaf      : http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard
> | g+        : https://plus.google.com/111233759991616358206/posts
> | skype     : jakobitsch-punkt
> | xmlns:tg  = "http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard#"
> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/