Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Joshua Allen wrote: > > No, the URI identifies what people use it to identify. In this case, > > the W3C. Invoking GET on that URI returns a hypermedia document, but > > that's different than saying that the URI identifies the document. > The > > document is a representation of the identified resource. > > Again, completely specious. Nobody uses "http://www.w3.org/Consortium" > in place of "W3C". People who use "http://www.w3.org/Consortium" are > quite clear that they have identified "A hypermedia dispenser which > serves up hypermedia about W3C". It is deceptive to claim otherwise. If TimBL tells me that he uses http://www.w3.org/Consortium to represent "W3C" then that is good enough for me -- the hypermedia dispenser is the server running some software, no? I've never considered the URI to identify that particular piece of software but perhaps you are breaking new ground. I am totally in favor of allowing whom ever registers a DNS entry to tell me what they intend URIs which use their DNS name to mean. For the names you register, and the paths that derive from them, I will understand your intentions to be that all such URIs refer to documents on your site. Despite your continuing protests and declarations, you've not given me a single concrete reason why the URIs that _I_ create using DNS entries that _I_ register ought always to refer to documents. Indeed when I ask Roy Fielding, he tells me otherwise, in no uncertain terms. Now I am not going to believe him just because he is a principle author of "Apache", but he has expressed his positions coherently and with justification. If you are going to disagree, fine, but I've still not seen a compelling reason for you to restrict my use of URIs. Jonathan
|
