- From: Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor <roconnor@uwaterloo.ca>
- Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 09:40:37 -0500 (EST)
- To: W3C HTML <www-html@w3.org>
On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Dan Connolly wrote: > Again, I've seen that claim, but nothing behind it. Who finds > them useful? And for what uses? And cannot those uses be > served by a URI? Wouldn't a FPI be usefull over a URL in the following sencerio. The W3C pays for it's domain name w3.org to InterNIC. InterNIC accepts it, but for some reason thinks they haven't. InterNIC sells the ``unregistered'' domin. w3.org is immediately bought you. w3.org becomes a porno site. Not nothing ... ahem ... validates, because a URL was used. Admiditaly using an FPI would have the same problem, but with a URL, *every* document must be changed, but for a FPI, only the catalogs need to be changed. As you well know, this is a reasonably likely sencerio. -- Russell O'Connor roconnor@uwaterloo.ca <http://www.undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca/~roconnor/> ``Paradoxically, a refusal to `put a monetary value on life' means that life is often undervalued.'' -- Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach
Received on Thursday, 17 February 2000 09:40:40 UTC