RE: I-D ACTION:draft-daigle-uri-std-00.txt

At 08:35 AM 9/7/00 -0700, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:
>Resources are first class objects - you identify them using URIs. When
>describing or talking about a resource, you use the URI to refer to that
>resource.

Do you really?  What resource exactly does the URI
http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml identify?

>You can never get to the resource - you can get a manifestation of the
>resource - for example by performing an HTTP GET request on it. A resource
>can have any number of manifestations - think of each manifestation as a
>snapshot of a living thing: you can take as many snapshots you like - some
>may be the same and some may not.

It seems, however, that we may have different manifestations based on the
context within which a URI is used - and no clear picture at all of what
the resource might actually be.

I'm tired of koans.

>I don't believe it mentions anywhere that you are describing URIs because
>that wouldn't make sense.

Then I suppose Namespaces in XML is foolish for using URI references in a
fashion that ignores the resource (or fails to define the relationship
between the namespace and the resource) entirely...

>A baseline comparison is exactly what RFC 2396 defines - you keep saying
>this - what is it that you don't see defined?

if (uriOne==uriTwo) {
   processing
}

I'd like a simple baseline definition for what exactly that == is supposed
to be, and what != would be, without requiring reference to every document
describing a scheme.  

Section 6 of RFC 2396 is inadequate in circumstances where applications
must deal with URIs of more than one scheme - especially if those URIs
don't "use elements of the common syntax".  I'll take byte-by-byte or
case-insensitive as a foundation happily, but it has to apply across the
board.  It clearly doesn't, at present.

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
XHTML: Migrating Toward XML
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books

Received on Thursday, 7 September 2000 11:50:30 UTC