RE: URI's for processes, stocks, file hashes, UPC's, etc..

Steve Pepper writes:

> One important consideration (if this really *is* to be an open 
> standard) is that your users should be able to figure out which 
> "subject" (web page, stock, product, service, etc.) the URI is 
> intended to denote, without necessarily having to use your service. 
> In other words: given an URI used as an "identifier" for an 
> arbitrary subject, it should be easy to discover what that subject is.

Well, I think you're being a bit quick in suggesting that as a design 
point.  In fact, there's a lot of emphasis on the Web on the opacity of 
URIs.  See [1] for an early exposition of this principle by Tim 
Berners-Lee, and "The Architecture of the World Wide Web" [2] for another 
explanation.   Indeed, the TAG is has nearly wrapped up publication of a 
finding devoted entirely to what you should or should not infer about a 
resource from inspection of its URI.  The draft finding is The Use of 
Metadata in URIs [3].  I suggest that those interested in the suggestion 
above consult all of these resources, as this is a topic that's been 
carefully considered as the Web has evolved.

Also, I strongly concur with Mark Baker's suggestion to use http-scheme 
URIs to solve the problem that is the subject of this thread.



Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

Received on Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:51:44 UTC