Lists Home |
Date Index |
I've no problem with that description of what is shared,
what is sharable, and what is negotiable. The addressing
component with its two logical parts is the only thing
I think has to be accepted for the rest to work sensibly.
But that isn't the same as telling everyone everywhere
anytime that without a URI, they don't exist. It just
means they aren't being noticed. There can be advantages
to nulling out a URI. Being below the radar is one. :-)
From: W. E. Perry [mailto:email@example.com]
I may be (the last?) naive true believer, but I am at least rational enough to
verify as well as trust. Yes, Virginia, there is a Web, consisting of all those
who will address one another with URIs while accepting that the responses they
might get were created in a different value space where different semantics
prevail. The opportunity is arbitrage which, on the whole over the past seven
centuries, has been the single most efficient model for wealth creation whether
you want to define wealth as money or as knowledge. I take from you what you
will export, stated in the terms of your locale and, of necessity, your
semantics. I instantiate it, or some parts of it, anew in my locale and in the
semantic terms which are my local advantage. I refactor it into components you
you would likely never have imagined, precisely because my expertise includes
knowing where I can ship those parts onward, to others who will instantiate them
locally to their own particular advantage.
If I were to begin by requiring you to have my understanding of your product, we
would likely never have the first interchange. My interest in the larger
mechanism is to preserve that possibility of the first blind and tentative
correspondence precisely because that will furnish the basis for my next profit.
The internetwork topology is the (at least potentially) worldwide framework
which enables those interchanges. Developing its full potential means using its
full range of possibilities, not constraining them to the small club who might
be willing to agree on some limited 'value space' a priori.