- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@apache.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 13:57:33 -0700
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
> At 06:45 PM 8/26/02 -0400, Ian B. Jacobs wrote: >> Resolved: Move "Some resources do not have URIs. URIs are >> denumerable, which means there are enough to give one to every >> real number without collisions, for example." to footnote. > > Surely, this is wrong? [1] (The bit about giving one to every real > number.) Yes, that was wrong -- denumerable would mean they are equivalent to the set of natural numbers, not real numbers. We started off discussing that and then fell down a rathole about it not belonging in the document at all, and then further into the pits of despair when I pointed out that URI are equivalent to real numbers anyway, which means they are not denumerable. In any case, I agree that it should not be in the architecture document. > [1] http://www.math.utah.edu/~alfeld/math/sets/realproof.html Just out of curiosity, could someone please explain why that same proof cannot be used to prove that URI are not denumerable? Just replace the real numbers in the proof with their equivalent representation as a URI. ....Roy
Received on Wednesday, 28 August 2002 17:00:32 UTC