[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I meant to be inclusive of all URL schemes. Saying "Take me to One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA 98052" does not tell you whether to fly, drive, cycle or walk with me there just that I should be taken to that physical location.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com]
Sent: Mon 8/12/2002 9:19 AM
To: Dare Obasanjo
Cc: Manos Batsis; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Comparable considered necessary
Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> XML namespaces is the only place I've seen URIs used significantly can you provide any others? Anyway, I decided to give one more shot at explaining my dislike of the whole URIs/URLs mess before bowing out. Here are some analogies
>
> URN: Microsoft
> URL: One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA 98052
> URI: Either of the above.
> Resource: The Microsoft Corporation
>
> The above is an illustration of why I like URLs and like URNs but despise URIs.
Er by URL do you mean HTTP URI or are you prepared to grant news: and
mid: and some other schemes?
I agree on liking URLs. With every year that passes I become less
convinced that URNs are a good idea. John Cowan provided a bunch of
examples on this list earlier (ISBNs, Usenet, etc) of places where the
identifying string does not, unlike http, imply a retrieval mechanism
but is still useful.
Personally, all the URIs I care about are HTTP URLs. Calling a URL a
URI has never caused me a problem. -Tim
|
