Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: > > > A URzed is always dereferenceable. If we accept that, then > > We don't. There is no supporting de jure evidence for this proposition, > and many counterexamples that one encounters daily. Thus the rest of > your arguments are uninteresting until they find some base in the real > world. I suspect I may agree with the conclusion you're heading > towards, but you'll have to find another way to get there. -Tim Well to me, it depends on what the meaning of "dereferencable" is. I'm happy to concede to Len's insistence that a UR* is always dereferencable. After all, if one puts up a catalog or index that takes a URN and spits out a usable resource in some way, you've "dereferenced" it. Of course, this isn't terribly useful as a basis for examining the architectural issues because any string is thus dereferenceable, including, say, an FPI. I'm not sure Schrödinger is such a great backdrop for this conversation. The planck constant is just not big enough to figure into the politics of identifiers. -- Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc. http://uche.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org http://fourthought.com Track chair, XML/Web Services One Boston: http://www.xmlconference.com/ The many heads of XML modeling - http://adtmag.com/article.asp?id=6393 Will XML live up to its promise? - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/li brary/x-think11.html
|
