- From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 17:31:20 +0100
- To: "'Norman Walsh'" <Norman.Walsh@sun.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: Norman Walsh [mailto:Norman.Walsh@sun.com] > Sent: 10 July 2003 20:12 > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: [metaDataInURI-31]: Initial draft finding for > public review/comme nt. <snip/> > | But before you can even broach that you have to decide on whether URIs > | should > | be opaque or not. That is where consensus must first be guaged. > > Handed a random URI about which you know nothing, my position > is that it is opaque and you've got no business peeking > inside it trying to guess stuff. So I can agree with that. No guessing... at most I'd only want to know what the relevant authoritative spec(s) (preferably a standards) allowed me to know. In terms of knowing nothing... does that means not knowing RFC2396? Not knowing the particular scheme in question? What if I do know 2396(bis) and the scheme in question? > Be seeing you, > norm > Cheers, Stuart --
Received on Friday, 11 July 2003 12:32:21 UTC