- From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 16:05:17 -0700
- To: "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
> > "If two people independently use the same URI as an identifier, they > > should be able to have a reasonable degree of confidence that they are > > identifying the same resource. > > > > People should not be required to parse, dereference, or otherwise > > acquire any *additional* disambiguating information to provide this > > basic guarantee. > > > > Resource naming practices should be considered carefully, and people are > > strongly discouraged from naming resources in a manner that > > unnecessarily weakens this guarantee." > > The intent seems good, but how on earth do you build this confidence? That's not addressed by the proposed text. > By relying on the human-language semantics of the opaque part of the I don't understand. > URI? Does this scale to very large datasets? Are you asking people to The second clause addresses scalability. If people need to parse, dereference, or otherwise provide *additional* disambiguating information to have any reasonable confidence that their identical URIs identify the same "thing", the system won't scale. > Hmm... I'd be way more comfortable with a trusted provider of RDF > assertions giving me lengthy-as-necessary descriptions of what any URI > points to, even if it That's not precluded by the proposed text. The proposed text says nothing at all about how you find out *what* a particular URI identifies. It simply says that a single URI reliably identifies the *same* thing, no matter what context it's used in. (In other words, it's ignoring the issue of *how* you find out what a URI identifies.)
Received on Monday, 29 July 2002 19:05:49 UTC