- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 07:53:19 -0500
- To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4EF3283F.30904@openlinksw.com>
On 12/22/11 4:37 AM, Henry Story wrote: > The problem with XRIs is that they require a big infrastructure to get > going. We already have HTTP so we can get going there with some > limitations, but with tools everybody understands. We have URIs. HTTP scheme URIs has the ubiquity of the InterWeb so its a nice low cost scheme for bootstrapping InterWeb scale Linked Data. HTTP isn't understood by everyone. If it was we wouldn't have the HttpRange-14 imbroglio that's been raging on forever, amongst other things. A data publisher can opt to make any URI scheme de-referencable, it just requires work on the part of the publisher. It also requires existence of user agents that grok URI abstraction re. functional ecosystem. "big infrastructure" is a FUD phrase. Just like "security issues" is a FUD phrase. If you want to make those kinds of claims why not substantiate them or include links to reference material? The Architecture of the World Wide Web (AWWW) is "deceptively simple". It solves a serious problem via elegant design. Trouble is, many misunderstand this design by trying to fight wars that boil down to adding specificity to something that's implicitly dexterous. AWWW is about *choice* via separation of powers. *Freedom of Choice* is non negotiable if you want to deliver technology that scales in a world that's naturally heterogeneous. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder& CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Thursday, 22 December 2011 12:53:42 UTC