- 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