- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 15:48:10 -0500
- To: "'Tim Bray'" <tbray@textuality.com>, www-tag@w3.org
Easy. The problem is here: "A Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) is a compact string of characters for **identifying** an abstract or physical resource." In section 1.1 " A resource can be anything that has **identity** Verb or noun? It can't be both. Identity is emergent, not native. It is the "has identity" bit that confuses and confounds. It might, but that is totally irrelevant to the act of identifying. The URI is assigned to the resource by an agency that can identify the resource. It is the prerogative of the agency (say authority) to say what a resource is or is not, is physical or abstract, etc. Once done, a URI is assigned. At that point, the use of the URI is a matter of habit formation, that is, the interpretive function is short-circuited. Habit formation is how complex adaptive systems become predictable (say, reliable). Therefore the assertion that the URI uniquely identifies a single resource is as reliable as the authority making the assertion. In the words of E. Barrymore: "That's all there is. There isn't any more." len From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com] Well, members of the community, the evidence is before you. What should the Webarch document say about these issues? -Tim
Received on Friday, 20 September 2002 16:48:46 UTC