Re: i0001: EPRs as identifiers - alternative proposal

The question is: What guidance are we giving to the world?

As you point out, we cannot stop people from doing things in ways that
are anti-Web, nor should we.  For whatever reasons, sometimes someone
may *need* to address Web resources using something other than a URIs.

But what *guidance* are we giving?  If Reference Properties are kept in
the spec, we would be *endorsing* a practice that is harmful to the Web
as a whole.

On the other hand, if we drop Reference Properties, people who really
need to address Web resources using non-URIs could still (ab)use
Reference *Parameters* to accomplish the same result, just as they
sometimes use cookies to do so today.  Thus, they would not be prevented
from doing what they may need to do, but they would be encouraged to do
things the Web way.



On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 05:45, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> How can one worry about how this stuff is used .. people are using
> cookies to identify stuff too but do we worry about that? There's
> nothing you can do about it; so, don't worry, be happy.
> 
> I'd say the same applies here; there's an architected role for them
> and there are all kinds of (ab)uses that people will do. Ain't nothin'
> we can do about that.
> 
> Sanjiva.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "David Booth" <dbooth@w3.org>
> To: "Francisco Curbera" <curbera@us.ibm.com>
> Cc: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 3:28 PM
> Subject: Re: i0001: EPRs as identifiers - alternative proposal
> 
> 
> > 
> > Paco,
> > 
> > The issue is not about how Reference Properties are described.  The
> > issue is about how they are *used*.  Calling them "addresses" instead of
> > "identifiers" changes nothing.
> > 
> > -- 
> > 
> > David Booth
> > W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
> > 
-- 

David Booth
W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard

Received on Wednesday, 8 December 2004 19:31:18 UTC