> > > > Most people wouldn't want to interact with beaches via http.
> > >
> > > But a representation of the beach might be useful to some.
> >
> > Not really. The HTTP-accessible *representations* that people might
> > want, could include representations of:
> >
> > * a view through a webcam belonging to a gyros vendor on the beach
> > * a map of the beach, highlighting particular facilities
> > * opinions and reviews about the beach
> > * recent news about the beach
> > * weather reports from the beach
> >
> > None of those ARE the beach, they are simply things ABOUT the beach.
> > They all deserve to have their own identity.
>
> Sorry, Joshua, but you don't get to arbitrate this. Each person is
free
Of course.
People are free to say "bad" when they mean "good". I am not trying to
arbitrate or mandate good form.
On the other hand, I think it is self-evidently stupid to use http:
identifiers to identify beaches (and I think you agree), and at a
minimum, I would hope that W3C don't start recommending such folly by
making pointless declarations about "the range of http is infinity and
beyond".
