Re: URIs for Physical Items

Paskin, Norman (DOI-ELS) <n.paskin@doi.org> wrote:

> I think we are in violent agremment here;

Surprisingly, I have to disagree with you on that point. I actually do agree
with what you are saying.

> Already we have succeeded in losing the distinction between URL and URI.  I
> wrote that a UR*L* is inappropraite for identifying a physical book or a
> class.  I fundamentally agree with you that they need identifying.  Your
> iBook is indeed real.  But its appropraite identifier is surley something
> like the serial number. By all means make that a URI.  Just don't create a
> web page, give the web page a URL, and expect that URl to do everything a
> serial number can. much less to refer to "all iBooks".

Exactly. Unfortunately however, since, as you say, URLs are the most
familiar and best implemented URI mechanism, they are being abused for
classifying physical objects, which is an unfortunate turn of events.

This is why I think some sort of URI-based identifier would be useful, to
allow people to use URLs but with a clear indication of their meaning.

People want to identify these things, unless you give them a way to, the URL
mechanism will continue to be abused.

-- 
[ Aaron Swartz | me@aaronsw.com | http://www.aaronsw.com ]

Received on Friday, 27 October 2000 17:15:36 UTC