Re: Boeing XRI Use Cases

On 7/15/08, Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>  Consider the ARK proposal (which I have always held up as a model of
>  how to use http: URIs to address requirements similar to many of the
>  requirements on XRI) [1].
>
>  It offers an approach in which e.g.
>
>       http://loc.gov/ark:/12025/654xz321
>       http://rutgers.edu/ark:/12025/654xz321
>
>  identify the _same_ object.  Implicit in the overall proposal is the
>  proposition that the above example URIs were minted by people other
>  than the owners of the domain names they begin with.  The minters
>  _are_ expected to be the owners of the subsidiary authority identified
>  by 12025 in the above URIs, and it only makes sense for them to do so
>  if they have an agreement in place with the owners of rutgers.edu and
>  loc.gov to serve and/or proxy to representations as specified by the
>  ARK RFC, which gives them a kind of second-hand ability to mint URIs.
>
>  Are you happy with that kind of design?

No, for the same reasons mentioned by others here.

Mark.
-- 
Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.         http://www.markbaker.ca
Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com

Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2008 15:17:07 UTC