W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > December 2007

RE: URI registries and schemes

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:36:51 -0500
To: "Mike Schinkel" <mikeschinkel@gmail.com>
Cc: uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF74FFCE54.57A05BD3-ON852573B6.007B8D25-852573B6.007C2879@lotus.com>
Mike Schinkel writes:

> But you don’t have: 
> 4.) Is not a document (i.e. is a 'thing') 

I can't speak for the rest of the TAG on this.  Indeed, as I've suggested 
before, I think this is better discussed on www-tag, where other members 
of the TAG and others interested in httpRange14 can chime in.  Speaking 
for myself, I'm not so sure. There are quite a variety of "things" that 
would not pass the "is it an IR?" test.  Once we start making codes for 
"it's not an IR", do we need subcodes for "it's got mass"?  Is a book, 
which is  a physical object that contains or conveys an information 
resource interestingly different from a rock?  I don't want to debate all 
that here.  I'm just saying that I personally don't feel that I understand 
well enough what people would want to know about the nature of a resource 
that isn't an IR.  So, I personally am in no rush to hatch to status 
codes, but others may disagree,

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------




Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2007 22:36:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:11 UTC