• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 14:54:56 -0500
• In-reply-to: <3C6AADA0.1847A32B@p...>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <E16al5H-0004sH-00@m...> <E16b19Y-00075R-00@s...> <3C6AADA0.1847A32B@p...>

On Wednesday 13 February 2002 01:17 pm, Paul Prescod wrote:
> http://www.somesite.com/foo.gif/the_real_thing
>
> If the owner of the site wants to give you access to the raw bits
> they will construct a URI with that invariant. 

The problem here is that you *do not know* what the owner is doing. 
While it's something of an esoteric point, because people ignore the 
distinction, it's kind of like shared libraries, where you have no 
control of the library you're loading (proxies fall into this category 
too).

• References:
  • Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: REST has too many verbs
• Next by Date: Re: WSIO vs. Semantic Web
• Previous by thread: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
• Next by thread: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract"URIs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread