Re: review Identification 8Jun

/ Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> was heard to say:
| re http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/webarch-20040608/
|
| I have a bunch of editorial suggestions; I sent those
| to Ian separately (with copy to www-archive). Substantively...

I'll do the same.

| I had some reservations about this in 2.2:
|
| "To keep communication costs down, by design a URI identifies one
| resource. Since the scope of a URI is global, the resource identified by
| a URI does not depend on the context in which the URI appears."

Yes, 2.4 is a long way off. I suggest making the phrase "identifies
one resource" a link to 2.4.

| but they're pretty much addressed by section 2.4. URI Overloading;
| perhaps a forward reference would help; I'm not sure. Perhaps
| it's OK as is.
|
| Then... er... conflict?
|
|   Good practice: URI opacity
|
|   Agents making use of URIs MUST NOT ...
|
| How can a MUST NOT constraint be just good practice?
| Either change the label to "Design Constraint" or
| change the MUST NOT somehow.

I think MUST NOT should be SHOULD NOT.

| I don't know if that conflict is a show-stopper or not; I'd
| like somebody else to give an opinion.

I don't think it's a show-stopper.

| Otherwise, I give it a thumbs-up.

I've read the whole thing again from front-to-back and didn't find
anything to complain about. Publish it!

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM / XML Standards Architect / Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.