OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] URIs harmful

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

I just want to say I completely disagree with your post. The reasoning is pretty suspect especially around the "insisting that it should always be dereferenceable breaks the web - every site must be available 24/7" part.  Websites being available 24/7 breaks the web??? On what planet? 

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Danny Ayers [mailto:danny666@virgilio.it] 
	Sent: Wed 7/24/2002 7:26 AM 
	To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org 
	Subject: RE: [xml-dev] URIs harmful

	I realise I'm coming in at the end of a long, long thread, but for what it's
	worth I reckon the URI is the best thing since sliced bread.
	Saying that it is an established practice to treat http://blah as a URL is
	IMHO a complete red herring. This meaning only really has validity when an
	agent is around to do the dereferencing - if a see
	http://www.big-red-buses.com written in an advertisement on the back of a
	bus, can it really be said to be a URL? In reality the common usage of this
	kind of syntax is actually as an identifier, which is commonly interpreted
	by appropriate agents (human or machine) as a URL. Not the same thing at
	There is an algorithm for resolving URLs, like there is an algorithm for
	delivering emails or even snail mail letters. But someone's address can
	exist without having a postal service - or would it be better to use
	different syntax there? Maybe my address book entries should be prefixed :
	[do not deliver to] John Smith, No.7, The Mews...
	to prevent the book disappearing in the hands of a dutiful postal agent.
	The talk of an 'expectation' is a major misrepresentation. Ok, under normal
	circumstances the agent will see http:// in HTML and behave appropriately.
	But the machine agent runs the algorithm, not the human - a reasonable
	argument for the identifiers in HTML href attributes always being
	dereferenceable, but that's all. The user may enter
	http://www.big-red-buses.com into the addresss bar of their browser only to
	find that it doesn't get anything - but it might actually be a traditional
	URL, and the site's down. If anything the use of URLs by humans like this
	just demonstrates how primitive most of today's web technology is. If this
	really is an expectation here, it's a pretty low one, not that far from
	expecting the user to use IP addresses instead.
	In any case, under what circumstances are the user's expectations liable to
	be cheated? I for one wouldn't be too disappointed if I copied and pasted a
	namespace declaration into the address bar of a browser and didn't get
	anything that made any sense.
	The fact that the URI may also be that of a deferenceable URL is a bonus, an
	agent can potentially get more information through this route, and
	recommendations are probably a good idea here on what should be at the other
	end (the RDF usage where a formal RDF Schema and/or a human-language
	description is usually found is probably a good start).
	The bottom line is that allowing http://blah etc. syntax to be treated as a
	non-deferenceable URI doesn't break anything, insisting that it should
	always be dereferenceable breaks the web - every site must be available
	Just another €0.02 for the retirement fund.
	Danny Ayers
	<stuff> http://www.isacat.net </stuff>
	Idea maps for the Semantic Web
	>-----Original Message-----
	>From: Thomas B. Passin [mailto:tpassin@comcast.net]
	>Sent: 24 July 2002 01:40
	>To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
	>Subject: Re: [xml-dev] URIs harmful
	>[Mike Brown]
	>> Thomas B. Passin wrote:
	>> > It would probably have been better if the W3C had said that,
	>if you want
	>> > have a pure identifier that is not intended to give network access to a
	>> > resource, then use the w3c-ndi: scheme ("W3C Non-dereferenceable
	>> > or some such, and to have issued an RFC that specified exactly those
	>> > semantics.
	>> "Non-dereferenceable identifier" would be an oxymoron, according to some,
	>> and depending on the definition of dereference, I would agree! :)
	>:-) Could be, Mike, but I bet everyone reading it knows just what I
	>intended!  Call it what you will, a special scheme for these things could
	>make sense.
	>Tom P
	>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
	>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
	>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
	>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
	>manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
	The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
	initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
	The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
	To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
	manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS