- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:24:39 -0400
- To: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Cc: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:15 AM, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com> wrote: > I read the primer as providing useful advice for the many situations in > which, for good or bad reasons, such separate URIs are not created. It doesn't read like this. A good way to present that would be to make clear from the start that there are normative specifications about the use of URIs for making assertions (such as the assertion of a property value) and then give practical advise on how someone implementing incorrect behavior can adjust their system to be within conformance. It would present other proposals (such as the property punning) as non-conformant and therefore damaging to applications that depend on specifications. It would not propose new techniques that are at variance with normative specification. It might explain some of the consequences of specific non-conformant uses of URIs, such as when they are intended to be ambiguous by sometimes referring to one resource and sometimes to another. A primer doesn't show incorrect usage except to point it out as such. -Alan
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2012 16:25:42 UTC