- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2012 10:25:29 -0400
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 20:35 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote: > Identity (and especially persistent identity) on the internet is an > unsolved problem, I think there may be some disagreements and/or misunderstandings about what this effort can achieve. These are only unsolved problems if you set your expectations too high. I agree that we cannot solve the identity problem in the absolute sense of defining an algorithm for determining the intended referent of URI 100% of the time, or even finding the right URI definition 100% of the time. But that is not what we should be trying to do. On the other hand we *can* solve the problem in the much more modest sense of providing useful value to many applications much of the time. *That* is what we should be trying to do -- not solving the identity problem in the absolute sense. > and AWWW is busted insofar as it depend on assuming that that URIs > have owners. The definition falls apart, leaving you with nothing. I am confused by your insistence that URIs don't have owners. You seem to be using the word "owner" in a different sense than the sense defined in AWWW http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#uri-ownership since by that definition, it is quite obvious that every URI *does* have an owner. Can you clarify what you mean by "owner", when you say that URIs don't have owners? -- David Booth, Ph.D. http://dbooth.org/ Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of his employer.
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2012 14:25:54 UTC