[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: XLink resource confusion (long)
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: "Christopher R. Maden" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, XML DEV <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 09:24:13 -0500
"A resource can be anything that has identity..."
The argument starts here. Until one has a formal
process for establishing identity, this definiton
is vacuous. Identity is and always is "system-bound".
"Not all resources are network retrievable."
This makes it worse. Now there is no means to
make identification by process system specific
if all we are talking about is a "resource".
"The resource is the conceptual mapping to an entity
or set of entities, not necessarily the entity
which corresponds to that mapping at any particular
instance in time."
Now we are back to a formal process, aka a mapping
with the proviso that a timestamp might be required
as part of the mapping.
In the IETF world, a resource is a thing, a massively
overload term with contradictory definitions. In
the ISO world, there is a PUBLIC name that may
be registered in a system, a System name that
must be resolvable.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Christopher R. Maden [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 12:00 AM
To: XML DEV
Subject: Re: XLink resource confusion (long)
At 02:16 1-05-2001, jackson wrote:
>I am confused as to the meaning of 'resource' in the
>the XLink draft spec [Spec]. I'd be glad of any comments.
The notion of resources is universal to the World Wide Web.
[Definition: As discussed in [IETF RFC 2396], a resource is
any addressable unit of information or service.]