- From: Bill dehOra <Wdehora@cromwellmedia.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 10:01:09 +0100
- To: xml-uri@w3.org
:brick://us/ny/nyc/13%20%E.%203rd%20St.?side=east&course=11&seq=25 Now, if you can explain me how to access that particular brick via the web...assuming of course we can agree on what referenced things are (we could argue about where the brick stops being the brick and so on). Sophistry aside, I think it's safe to say we are dealing with electronic resources, and while there may be some kind of intuitive or commonsense ('obvious') correllation between things that are not in the web, such as the entity John Cowan or Bill de hÓra or a particular brick, any representations of these entities within the web that can be designated, as you say via the URI scheme, are just that, representations of things, not the things themselves. So we enter into a pretence that the electronic resource that stands for brick is the brick for the purposes of electronic discourse. We are after all in the indirection business, and thus can be thankful that we do not live in Plato's Republic, and should be prepared to engage in a bit of reality hacking if needs be. :> > A resource *is* abstract; the same resource can get a :> > different entity body every time you access it, e.g. :> > gopher://www.ccil.org:13/0. :> :> I'm afraid I think this is just wrong. Dereferencing that URL :> gets me a different entity body every time, but it's far from :> clear that it gets me a different resource. Indeed, it's winning approach to think of the resources as persistent in time. There have been a lot of molecules replaced for other molecules in the physical bodies of the participants of this list in the last 24 hours (with pretty good morphological persistence I grant you), but I can conveniently assume that these are the same people and will be the same people tommorrow. In fact I would be concerned if such molecular tumult stopped :-) -Bill
Received on Wednesday, 24 May 2000 04:59:47 UTC