- From: John Bradley <john.bradley@wingaa.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 10:27:21 -0700
- To: elharo@metalab.unc.edu
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
- Message-Id: <D2B1920E-3451-442F-B3F5-85DC262D4F87@wingaa.com>
Hi Elliotte, To some extent your opinion is reflected in the discussions we are having around the HXRI format. This encodes the required query parameters in a http: URI that can be used via a proxy to retrieve metadata for abstract XRI identifiers encoded in the path. It is the belief of some but perhaps not all, that this is acceptable Web Architecture. Some people will argue that the XRI, ARK, PURL and other registries that may be consulted are a needless duplication of DNS functionality and should be discouraged. Others argue that those registries provide new abstraction or other functionality. I think the ability to do metadata discovery of an abstract identifier is valuable. People will differ on the best way to achieve this, or if it is a valid use case in the first place. I take it that you are opposed to XRI being a separate scheme with the purpose of returning meta-data for abstract identifiers. Do you have any feelings on integrating XRI into http via the HXRI mechanism we have been discussing elsewhere on this list? Regards John Bradley OASIS IDTRUST-SC http://xri.net/=jbradley 五里霧中 On 7-Aug-08, at 7:59 AM, Elliotte Harold wrote: > John Bradley wrote: >> Hi Roy, >> XRI resolution is about retrieving meta data for resources. It is >> not about retrieving resourced http: is about that. > > Thanks. That actually makes this discussion clear to me for the > first time; and now that I understand it I know where I stand. > > IMHO, the difference between metadata and data is mostly in > interpretation and solely in the information retrieved. That is, the > format of information returned should be independent of the protocol > used to retrieve it. We do not have and should not have separate > schemes for separate times of information. Separate protocols for > metadata and data is like separate protocols for JPEGS and text, or > XML and protobufs. > > Data formats should be network transport independent. Network > protocols should be data format independent. > > I'm not sure if that's an explicit principle of the Web > architecture. It may have seemed so obvious that no one thought to > state it, or realized they were relying on it. However it most > certainly is a strong characteristic of layered network protocol > design. > > -- > Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu > Refactoring HTML Just Published! > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0321503635/ref=nosim/ > cafeaulaitA
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Thursday, 7 August 2008 17:28:06 UTC