Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
If you recommended that, you are obligated to: 1. Answer all bug reports from any and all users of documents with the http-empowered names for which no representations are retrieved (by intent) 2. Write the section of the Government recommendations that explains why it is a good idea to use http-empowered names in cases where no representation will ever be retrieved by dereferencing because the intent of the author wasn't clearly expressed (by omission). 3. Answering all future questions and resolving all future permathreads on the futility of using http-empowered names in cases where the author can't make up their mind about what they intend (by confusion). 4. Donate your current and all future income to paying off the increased costs of using http-empowered names for any of the above because someone a few years ago said it was a sin to use a non-http-dereferencable name on the world wide web. If you can find them at the W3C, you might inveigle them to share your pain. Or just do as RDF does and make a hash of it. ;-) len From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@b...] As a sidenote, I recommended that this document be updated to also include URL formats for namespace identifiers. Oh, which reminds me: I need to check on its status...
|
