W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-uri@w3.org > May 2000

Re: PUBLIC v. SYSTEM not URI v. FPI

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 16:58:03 -0400 (EDT)
To: Rick JELLIFFE <ricko@geotempo.com>
cc: xml-uri@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0005241650150.20889-100000@tux.w3.org>


On Thu, 25 May 2000, Rick JELLIFFE wrote:
[...]
> I think they could, iff the RFCs for each access method defined
> it as a property.  For example, if whatever RFC defines  ftp: 
> said "The property of persistance should not be implied about
> a URI that uses the ftp: method".  
> 
> I haven't checked all the RFCs, but I don't recall that they do
> give this information.  So the problem is not URIs but that there
> is no way to provide a warrant about them.  
> 
> <hobbyhorse>If my idea that
> namespace URIs should be used as a base from which well-known
> relative URLs could be used to locate various information, such
> a warrant could be downloaded for a URL, using PICS I suppose.
> Would that require too much of a descent from 50,000 feet? </>

Makes sense to me, though I'd prefer pointy brackets and (in http
case) content-negotiation to PICS as the mechanism to impart such
information. Such disclosure is similar to the privacy-policy disclosures
described by P3P, so there might be something to borrow from there...

This idea also crops up in http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/NameMyth.html
incidentally, excerpted below.

Dan (severely WWW9-lagged; reading this list in reverse order)


From http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/NameMyth.html

[...]

Quality of Service 

Looking at an "http:" URL, while some look more sensible than others, it
is not immediately evident whether
great pains are being taken to make the name very persistent.  We have
just discussed such a range of reasons
why names can change, and clearly the social and contractual arrangements
can be quite involved, so it is
clearly difficult to simply define a quality of service for
naming.  However, defining some well known quality of
service levels would be a very useful task. This is the sort of task
ideally suited to a group of trechnologies,
librraians or archivists. 

In any event, for identifiers in the http space and many others, it would
be useful to be able to assert what the
quality of service is. This is information about a URI and a
resource.  Like the information about generic URIs,
it is about the sort of identity between the URI and the resource. 

   Metadata should be used to express the quality of service for the binding
   between a URI and a resource.
Received on Wednesday, 24 May 2000 16:58:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:42 UTC