RE: resources and URIs

On Thu, 2003-07-17 at 09:40, Williams, Stuart wrote:
> Well... I wish I understood the case for it being so wrong... 'illegal' in
> Tim's words.
> To be frank... I don't understand it... and don't see the need for the
> constraint... and I know I'm addressing a champion of the 'minimal
> constraint' principle.
> Last time you and I spoke about it you spoke in less black and white terms
> and about an 'economic' rationale - it is more 'costly' done this way...


>  but
> I have failed to recreate that discussion... did you write it down anywhere?

umm... I don't think so.

Sandro and I and others have written some relevant stuff

but I haven't actually figured out how to write down my
intuitions about economic justification for HashURIs.

> Equally, if some argument has convinced you to take a more absolute stance
> I'd be interested to know what it is/was.


> FWIW you will also see use of http scheme URI (without fragments) in SOAP1.2
> Part 2 recommendation [1] to name features and properties.
> Stuart
> --
> [1]

p.s. your mailer doesn't do threading. That's a pain.
Any chance I could talk you into switching to a mailer
that does?

Dan Connolly, W3C

Received on Thursday, 17 July 2003 11:13:41 UTC