Re: Attributes should only be there if part of the name/address space

Dan Connolly (connolly@w3.org)
Thu, 20 Feb 1997 19:15:13 -0600


Message-Id: <330CF721.40E57757@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 19:15:13 -0600
From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Cc: Daniel LaLiberte <liberte@ncsa.uiuc.edu>, uri@bunyip.com
Subject: Re: Attributes should only be there if part of the name/address space

Yeah... what he said.

Larry Masinter wrote:
> 
> This all got better for me when I just admitted that the
> definitions were circular, and decided that it was OK.
> 
> What's a resource?
>    Something that has a URI.
> 
> What's a URL?
>    Something that locates a resource.
> 
> What's a URN?
>     Something that names a resource.
> 
> If you can name it, it's a resource. Different resources
> have different names. A single resource might have
> multiple names. You can't "get" a resource, you can
> only interact with it. One way to interact with
> a resource is to obtain an entity that is a representation
> of the resource at a given point in time.
> 
> This isn't smalltalk, it's webtalk. "Web" for me is
> defined not by HTTP and HTML, but by this fundamental
> architectural point, that some entities contain URIs
> that locate/name other entities.
> 
> Larry

I suppose it's enough to say "same URL implies same
resource" and that "different URL implies different
resource" isn't useful or necessary.

Dan