- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 08:54:00 +0000
- To: "Larry Masinter" <LMM@acm.org>, "ext Eric Hellman" <eric@openly.com>, P atrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: uri@w3.org
_____________Original message ____________ Subject: RE: uri, urn and info Sender: ext Eric Hellman <eric@openly.com> Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 08:29:58 +0000 for example x-info:ticker:nyse:TWX (the persistence issue aside, for the moment) Here is a prime example of why an http: URI would be a far more useful means of denotation than an info: URI. If the above were rather, e.g. http://ticker.info.niso.org/nyse/TWX Then web users could (potentially) obtain a representation of the current state of the TWX ticker simply by dereferencing it (with probable redirection from ticker.info.niso.org to a NYSE server) without any change to the present, globally deployed web infrastructure. That doesn't mean the URI *has* to resolve to anything, but deciding whether it does, and if so, to what, is not affected by the URI itself. And if decided at first to provide no representations, a change to that decision has no impact on either its denotation or its non-resolvable usage to date. Likewise, SW agents could (potentially) obtain (by means of a standardised solution such as URIQA) an authoritative, formal, RDF description of the denoted resource, which could include the state of the ticker expressed precisely, suitable for inference engines to e.g. deduce whether one should buy or sell ;-) But "hiding" the denoted resource behind an info: URI (even if it can eventually be "found" via ad hoc resolution schemes) is hindering, not helping, the web and SW. Regards, Patrick
Received on Thursday, 9 October 2003 01:53:46 UTC