On 10/14/11 11:36 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
On 14 Oct 2011, at 16:16, Kingsley Idehen wrote:Now when Hugh simply states URI and quibbles about the effects of URI indirection.I consider your accusation that I am "quibbling" deeply insulting in the context of a professional discussion, and entirely inappropriate on a w3c mailing list.http://www.thefreedictionary.com/quibble 1. To evade the truth or importance of an issue by raising trivial distinctions and objections. 2. To find fault or criticize for petty reasons; cavil.
s/quibble/complain.I absolutely have/had no intention of insulting you (I said I quibble too). I meant complain, gripe, take issue with etc.. Apologies, for sure, if you think I was trying to insult you (I wouldn't do that to you in public or private).
I am taking issue with the following, specifically: confusing use of term: URI, Non Information Resource etc..
Using the above loosely, simply perpetuates confusion. A URI can be used to Name anything, and that includes a Location (Address). A Location is a very specific thing. A URL is a specific kind of URI i.e., it is an Address. And yes, a URL is a kind of URI. The fundamental issue is *indirection* a feature of URI abstraction.When you speak about URIs (with indirection in play) it simply leads to confusion. Please don't assume the make of the mailing list. It isn't a place where specific language is accepted by all, which is why I would like us to be clearer.
Kingsley
-- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
-- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
