Lists Home |
Date Index |
Joshua Allen wrote:
> > No, the URI identifies what people use it to identify. In this case,
> > the W3C. Invoking GET on that URI returns a hypermedia document, but
> > that's different than saying that the URI identifies the document.
> > document is a representation of the identified resource.
> Again, completely specious. Nobody uses "http://www.w3.org/Consortium"
> in place of "W3C". People who use "http://www.w3.org/Consortium" are
> quite clear that they have identified "A hypermedia dispenser which
> serves up hypermedia about W3C". It is deceptive to claim otherwise.
If TimBL tells me that he uses http://www.w3.org/Consortium to represent "W3C" then
that is good enough for me -- the hypermedia dispenser is the server running some software, no?
I've never considered the URI to identify that particular piece of software but perhaps you are
breaking new ground.
I am totally in favor of allowing whom ever registers a DNS entry
to tell me what they intend URIs which use their DNS name to mean.
For the names you register, and the paths that derive from them,
I will understand your intentions to be that all such URIs refer to documents on your site.
Despite your continuing protests and declarations, you've not given me a single concrete reason why
the URIs that _I_ create using DNS entries that _I_ register ought always to refer to documents. Indeed
when I ask Roy Fielding, he tells me otherwise, in no uncertain terms.
Now I am not going to believe him just because he is a principle author of "Apache", but he has expressed
his positions coherently and with justification.
If you are going to disagree, fine, but I've still not seen a compelling reason for you to
restrict my use of URIs.