[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Tim Bray scripsit:
> (a) have a built-in way to disambiguate between what the resource "is"
> and what it's "about"
> (b) use different names.
>
> I prefer (b), and would encourage people to use something like
> http://www.heritage.org/Shakespeare for the person and the URI above for
> the picture.
The trick with (b) is that you are then impaled on this dilemma:
(b1) Dereferencing "http://www.heritage.org/Shakespeare"; returns something,
(b2) Dereferencing "http://www.heritage.org/Shakespeare"; returns nothing.
With (b1) you now have yet another document and have to bifurcate again;
with (b2) you get a lot of surprised people who dereference an http: URL
and get nothing, just like with namespaces. Given this choice, I like
(a) better.
--
If you understand, John Cowan
things are just as they are; http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
if you do not understand, http://www.reutershealth.com
things are just as they are. jcowan@reutershealth.com
|
