Re: ARK and aliases (was: Boeing XRI Use Cases)

briefly and somewhat belatedly...
by way of excuse, the subject line isn't all that helpful.

On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 21:59 +0100, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> Suppose I and my friend start a club, and we agree that we will keep
> duplicate copies of all the club records under the top-level 'club'
> directory on our respective web-sites.  That is, we agree that
> and
> will identify the same resource and, to the best of our ability, that
> we will respond with identical messages to GET requests to those
> URIs.  Furthermore we make it a condition of joining our club that new
> members do likewise.
> Is this fundamentally at variance with Web Architecture?  I don't
> think so.  AWWW does say [1]
>    "Good practice: Avoiding URI aliases
>     A URI owner SHOULD NOT associate arbitrarily different URIs with
>     the same resource."
> but in this case the two URIs are _not_ arbitrarily different, they
> are in fact non-arbitrarily similar.

I think they *are* aliases, and they fall under "should not"
but ARK goes to some length to explain why the exception;
in short: because there is no one social entity that
would serve as domain holder.

more when I find time, I hope...

Dan Connolly, W3C
gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Thursday, 24 July 2008 17:05:06 UTC