- From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 09:41:40 -0500
- To: www-tag@w3.org
GK@ninebynine.org (Graham Klyne) writes: >I found TimBL's posting to be very illuminating: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Sep/0043.html > >I think there's an important identifier/reference distinction to be >maintained here. I think TimBL has made a fundamental mistake. In that post, he appears not to recognize the representation-bound nature of fragment identifiers and thereby permits himself to conflate resource identifiers with identifiers tangled in representation issues. Calling them both URIs is perfectly fine, if the "R" can stand alternately for "resource" and "representation" - because the nature of the identification process itself changes as soon as a fragment identifier is used. If this is illumination, it is very dark in here. There are cases where this doesn't matter. There are cases where this does matter. Recognizing the difference seems like a good first step toward understanding both the power and the limitations of Web architecture. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2003 09:40:47 UTC