Re: Sticking another fork in the URI issue

Tim Bray writes:
>So I grant that the angst exists - but I claim that it exists nowhere
>in the real world with the intensity observed among the contributors
>to xml-dev and www-tag.  

That could perhaps be because the contributors to xml-dev and www-tag
are the only ones who have so far experienced a "NAKED Lunch - a frozen
moment when everyone sees what is on the end of every fork."  ("Steely"
knives -> Steely Dan -> Naked Lunch -> etc.) 

Most web developers are still perfectly happy talking about URLs, and
haven't been forced to think about URIs in the least.  It's deeply
unsurprising that they haven't risen in open revolt against this
nastiness, since they never have to deal with it directly.  

I think Dare Obasanjo and various others have made it clear that XML
developers are quite frequently put off by this "angst" "in the real
world", whether or not they post to xml-dev or www-tag.  

I suspect also that you'll find the most intense support for Namespaces
in XML and URI madness on www-tag, xml-dev, and perhaps a few
URI-centric lists.

>This granted, I find that the utility of the
>resource/URI/representation framework more than makes up for it - it
>enabled us to build the Web after all.  

This claim is utterly bogus when resources and identifiers are treated
as abstractly as much of the URI community chooses to do.  A much less
sophisticated set of notions which do in fact relate the resources
hidden inside web browser caches to active listeners on a network
enabled the Web to be built.


-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether

Received on Friday, 11 October 2002 14:25:17 UTC