[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
What is sad here is that so far not a single point
has been raised either scientifically, philosophically,
or from an engineering point of view that hasn't
been raised before. If the point is to gather
into the architecture doc what the common view is
of a resource, Joshua Allen said it last year,
"it is a hypertext dispenser" which Pat generalized
back to "it is a representation dispenser" and
which for a possibly very large group of people,
it is a server. A URI itself is defined completely
in terms of syntax just like XML, so what it
'means' depends on who is speaking, therefore
as has been asserted numerous times here there
and elsewhere, the assertion that it identifies
one and only one "thing" is as true as the
context of use. The problem then becomes
how to bound the web as a system or context
of use (system is data plus operations) such
that all properties of that definition are
provable and then to examine case by case
what overlaps there are with other systems
that use the URI.
None of that is news since the 1950s.
As to the Pat as The Authority vs Tim as
The Authority, that's a popularity contest.
Last year's hit means nothing to this
year's playlist except B rotation.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@xegesis.org]
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 19:52:35 -0400, Simon St.Laurent
<simonstl@simonstl.com> wrote:
> In case today's xml-dev didn't have enough political discussion of
> technical issues for you, may I strongly recommend:
>
> http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/07/23/deviant.html
>
> The issues are URIs and RDF, and a whole lot more.
I also recommend http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-
tag/2003Jul/0302.html (the latest major post by Pat Hayes in that TAG
megathread) as a very astute conclusion to the multi-year debate on
resources, representations, URIs, etc.:
|
