W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > January 2005

Re: Duplication of provisional URI namespace tokens in 2717/8-bis

From: Jason Robinson <jrobinson@kitchenpages.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:18:22 -0800
Message-ID: <008001c50039$6a60ecc0$06ffa8c0@kitchenpages.net>
To: <uri@w3.org>

I tend to agree with Marks ideal.

Also having a unique system in my IMHO causes more problems as I already
have 'a botched up' system of non-unique URI to start with.
The various 'file protocols' old and new depending on my application
interfaces installed on various machines allows different results but they
are somewhat dependable.

just my 1 cents worth.  (half as many)

:-)

Jason Robinson
jrobinson@kitchenpages.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
To: "Weibel,Stu" <weibel@oclc.org>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: Duplication of provisional URI namespace tokens in 2717/8-bis


>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 01:24:59PM -0500, Weibel,Stu wrote:
> > It would be helpful if those who hold the view expressed here could
> > indicate explain why assuring uniqueness is detrimental.
>
> My main issue with ensuring uniqueness is that it requires saying "No"
> to somebody who simply wants to tell the world about the URI schemes
> they minted.
>
> Mark.
> --
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Thursday, 20 January 2005 21:23:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:08 UTC