- From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
- Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 14:49:28 -0400
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "xml-uri@w3.org" <xml-uri@w3.org>
Dan Connolly wrote: > Who said they must? People have talked about "1:1 relationships" between URIs and resources. The term "1:1" is ambiguous (see my previous posting) but is susceptible of being interpreted as meaning "bi-unique". Also, it seems to me that "http://www.reutershealth.com/scritchifchisted" does not represent a resource, and that I have the authority to say so. > Hmm... if two things are identical, they're identical > in every possible respect. If unicode.org turned off > its ftp server and left its http server running one day, > then you could observe a difference between what > the two URIs above denote. Heh heh... that is indeed the case at present, as ftp.unicode.org is broken. However, the *intent* of the Unicode Consortium is that they are the same in every respect. > But perhaps not... perhaps a "connection refused" isn't > an observation of the resource, but a *failure* to > observe the resource. Just so. > And it's generally not sound > to conclude anything (including that X!=Y) from > a lack of information. That depends. If there is no discoverable evidence that Wen Lee is guilty of espionage, then it would be sound to conclude (provisionally) that he is not a spy. Or so thought the judge. -- There is / one art || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2000 14:49:27 UTC