[topicmapmail] multiple Source Locators

[Jan Algermissen]

Kal Ahmed wrote:

> > Yes, I think so too, but the problem (at least for me) is that the
> > notion of addressing a piece of data just does not exist on the Web. When
> > I finally understood REST a year ago or so, I suddenly realized, that we
> > cannot just arbitrarily define the meaning of certain aspects of a technological
> > environment, but that, by using a particular environment, we are bound to its
> > definitions. A URI NEVER addresses a piece of data and we cannot change that
> > by saying that the subject address refers to the piece of data that *is* is the
> > subject. With URIs, this is meaningless.
> >
> That is certainly true of http:// URIs, but is it true of all URI
> schemes ? What about the data: URI scheme ? It is nitpicking in a sense,
> but it also points out that even with a defined "Web" architecture,
> there are uses of URIs which do not fit into this view.

Sorry, my mistake. URLs I meant to say. OTH, I'll seek for answeres on
this issue when time permits (aka 'will put it on my list' :-)
Clearly, the interaction with non-http URIs is still via HTTP (via gateways) when
accessed within Web context, but that does not solve the question what these
URIs identify (or what assumptions one can make about the resources, especially not
if they *are* data).

It ws definitely not nitpicking.

Do you have a pointer on the data: scheme, that's new to me.

> Aye, and its not an issue to which there is an easy answer as yet. If
> there was, then RDF and Topic Maps folks would be doing that and not
> spending their Monday nights typing long emails to each other ;-)

:-)


Jan


> Cheers,
> 
> Kal
> 
> --
> Kal Ahmed <kal@techquila.com>
> techquila

-- 
Jan Algermissen                           http://www.topicmapping.com
Consultant & Programmer	                  http://www.gooseworks.org