- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 16:22:42 -0400
- To: "Hammond, Tony (ELSLON)" <T.Hammond@elsevier.com>
- Cc: "'Eric Hellman'" <eric@openly.com>, Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, uri@w3.org
> To sum up, with regard to the info scheme, less is more.
Thanks, you've just argued wonderfully why the tag: URI scheme [1] is
so desirable. With info:, there's still a sort of central authority;
you're still trusting the info-registry in some sense, even if it's
not as great as trusting a domain name owner + the dns. With tags,
you don't have to trust anyone. Much better.
I happen to think distrusting owner+dns is unwarranted FUD. doi.org
is every bit as secure as doi:, etc. And dereference is very useful.
So I haven't been working very hard on evangelizing tags and getting
it done as an RFC. I'm still willing to be a co-author because I
think it may be useful to some people, especially folks who would
otherwise end up stuck in DOI or INFO land.
So if you are into DOI/INFO for the money, ego, or control, go right
ahead with it. (I guess I'll also grant that info: saves you a few
characters in your URIs. Tags were a bit shorter until one of our
changes solely intended to appease the IESG.) If you just want to
separate yourself from the tyrrany of dereference, why don't you help
tag: along instead?
-- sandro
[1] http://www.taguri.org/
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2003 16:21:44 UTC