W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > July 2003

Re: Proposal: new top level domain '.urn' alleviates all need for urn: URIs

From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 13:23:30 -0400
To: "Weibel,Stu" <weibel@oclc.org>
Cc: uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <20030709172330.GI23893@skunk.reutershealth.com>

Weibel,Stu scripsit:

> The distinction between the first and the second resides at the DNS level
> (two domains pointed at the same machine... not all that uncommon).  Clearly
> these two are different URLs that resolve to the same resource.

So you say.  But how do we know that, absent a clear-cut operational
definition of "resource"?  A resource cannot be identified with the MIME
entity body that is returned when you GET it:  the resources may be
different even though the entity bodies are bit-for-bit identical and
have the same media type; contrariwise, a single resource may return
different entity bodies on different retrievals.

So the most you can say is that two URIs always return the same entity
bodies (or none at all), which cannot be established empirically because
it has to span the entire past and future history of those URIs.

-- 
John Cowan  www.ccil.org/~cowan  www.reutershealth.com  jcowan@reutershealth.com
All "isms" should be "wasms".   --Abbie
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2003 13:24:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:06 UTC