Re: URIs vs EPRs

Earlier, I said;
> Presumably you mean reference parameters?  And I'd agree, sometimes you
> do need shared state.  What you don't need though, in my experience, is
> to bundle the state or a reference to it with the identifier, and call
> the resulting beast an identifier, since that's not what it is.

Sorry, upon reflection, that didn't come out quite right.

It's still an identifier, it just identifies something separate (but
related) to the endpoint.  I think we all know the trade-offs involved
in choosing between using cookies vs. session ids in URIs.

In the case of cookies, the state is separated from the identifier,
while for session ids, the id at least remains opaque and therefore URIs
alone would suffice as they need no explicit mechanism for holding this
data.

Mark.
-- 
Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca

Received on Sunday, 7 November 2004 18:18:26 UTC