- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 01:40:06 -0600
- To: "Ron Daniel Jr." <rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov>
- Cc: Daniel LaLiberte <liberte@ncsa.uiuc.edu>, touch@isi.edu, uri@bunyip.com
Ron Daniel Jr. wrote: > Well, there is at least one place where I think a useful technical > distinction can be made. URNs are to be location-independent. Not > only is the notion of a "location-independent locator" a bit > tortured, I would have a hard time calling > http://www.foo.com/whatever > a URN since it clearly has a preferred location for resolution. OK, I'll bite: how is it that "location-dependent" vs. "location-independent" is a technical distinction? What mechanism depends on or uses the distinction in any way? What's the test for "location dependent"? For 20 points: tell me the location of http://www.w3.org/. The evidence you give -- that you would have a hard time calling it a URN -- is exactly the sort of _non-technical_ difference in perspective that I'm talking about. Dan
Received on Friday, 21 February 1997 02:40:38 UTC