- From: Eric Hellman <eric@openly.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 23:19:05 -0400
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: "Hammond, Tony (ELSLON)" <T.Hammond@elsevier.com>, Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, uri@w3.org
"even less is even more"? the question to ask is whether "tag:" is *enough* . A useful approximation is info ~= tag + namespace registry The merits of the registry described in the info internet-draft are there to be discussed, but an identifier namespace registry is definitely needed for many applications. At 4:22 PM -0400 10/1/03, Sandro Hawke wrote: > > 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/ -- Eric Hellman, President Openly Informatics, Inc. eric@openly.com 2 Broad St., 2nd Floor tel 1-973-509-7800 fax 1-734-468-6216 Bloomfield, NJ 07003 http://www.openly.com/1cate/ 1 Click Access To Everything
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2003 23:19:12 UTC