[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Comparable considered necessary
- From: "Manos Batsis" <m.batsis@bsnet.gr>
- Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 17:07:11 +0300
- Cc: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Thread-index: AcJB3EGuZ+mpA3SXSMq9eqoWwtg2hwAADhCYAABmS4AADeGvfQAvBoTQ
- Thread-topic: [xml-dev] Comparable considered necessary
> From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@microsoft.com]
> 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
Yes, this explains your argument clearly; it really is a philosophical
debate above all, able to move towards any direction. IMHO the
distinction to be made here is that the URN is an identifier for an
abstract entity (i.e. a non-retrievable resource) and the URI is an
identifier for a physical one (one that can be retrieved/visited).
This means that we are not necessarily in disagreement and I hope it
also explains why I placed my bets on the distinction between
retrievable/non retrievable resources (which especially bothers me in
XML Names); this perhaps would remove what you dislike in URIs.
Regards,
Manos
|