• To: "'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: new URI dust-up
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:18:46 -0500

Yes, and it is such an old argument at this point, we 
can do it by the numbers.  I thought it interesting that 
one editor believed the best thing to do with the problems 
of knowing if a resource or a representation is 'on the web' 
is to remove that phrase altogether.

I doubt the mathIsLogic and the observerIsProofOfExistence 
camps will get together this season or ever.  Both the 
world and the web keep on working though.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...]

There's some good reading over at www-tag on the many "social" issues
surrounding URIs.  The context is RDF-specific, but seems appropriate to
XML URI usage as well.

Original message (TimBL):
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0022.html

Contrasting reply (Pat Hayes):
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0147.html

There's lots of potentially useful food for thought in there, though I'm
still fond of this formulation:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jan/0301.html

www-tag seems to be coming back to (cranky) life lately, albeit on
familiar territory.  If anyone thinks, for instance, that the W3C,
Apache, and IETF get along magically, try:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0057.html

• Prev by Date: new URI dust-up
• Next by Date: RE: [ANN] Sarissa XML-JavaScript library version 0.9b3 released
• Previous by thread: new URI dust-up
• Next by thread: RE: [ANN] Sarissa XML-JavaScript library version 0.9b3 released
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread