- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:41:09 -0400
- To: Etan Wexler <ewexler@stickdog.com>
- Cc: Semantic-Web discussion list <semantic-web@w3.org>
sandro:
> > The point of tag: URIs is to allow you to identify things when you
> > don't want to allow people to "follow their nose", because you are not
> > willing to maintain a web presence.
Etan Wexler:
> It's hardly my place to tell you, Sandro, in your role as co-author of
> the specification of the tag URI scheme, the point of tag URIs, but
> the point that you give casts an aspersion on tag minters by stating the
> case in backwards fashion. 
That was intended.   Of course I don't mean anything personal about
anyone minting tags, but I do mean there to be a strong "considered
harmful" sense to my comment.   Tags are a sort of last resort for
most applications I know of.
> It may be that one is unwilling to maintain a Web presence even
> though one would very much like to allow people to metaphorically
> follow their nose. There are barriers between many people and the
> maintenance of a proper Web presence.
Like what?  I think many people vastly over-estimate those barriers,
in this context.  Of course you've got to have (or hire) some
expertise and a little time and money, but especially if you use
services like purl.org and thing-described-by.org, what is so
difficult?   Maybe it depends what you mean by "proper" web presense;
a little RDF page is all that's needed for this application.
> Discussion may want to jump to the URI Interest Group (<mailto:uri@w3.org>).
Or www-tag -- the issue of cost-of-maintaining-a-web-presense is
broad, but we're probably thinking about it in a SemWeb way.  Guess
I'll leave it here.
    -- sandro
Received on Saturday, 15 October 2005 12:41:16 UTC