Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Joshua Allen wrote: > > It's not a matter of restricting. Most people will make reasonable > assumptions about the nature of a resource being identified based on its > name (why would the name include a particular token, like "http:", if > it doesn't serve to identify, anyway?) This is dead wrong. Most people will make reasonable assumptions about the nature of a resource being identified based on its _representations_. > > If you fly against the reasonable assumptions people make, and declare > that in YOUR identifiers, the "scheme" part is irrelevant, that's not > enough. You also then have to change what everyone else does, because > "words mean what people use them to mean". People will reasonably ask, > "why restrict my interpretation of the name that way?" aslja alsaldj jdjd ooiepoi ppoop oppopo @
|
