 |
 |
Because the ability to de-reference seems to be the main reason to use an HTTP URI as an identifier, and the main reason that some people prefer an HTTP URI as an identifier to an info: URI. Jonathan Mike Taylor wrote: > Ross Singer writes: > > There should be no issue with having both, mainly because like I > > mentioned earlier, nobody cares about info:uris. > > > > Take, for instance, DOIs. What do you see in the wild? Do you ever > > see info:uris (except in OpenURLs)? If you don't see > > http://dx.doi.org/ URIs you generally see doi:10... URIs. It seems > > like having http and info URIs would *have* to be fine, since > > info:uris *not being dereferenceable* are far less useful (I won't go > > so far as 'useless') on the web, which is where all this is happening. > > What on earth does dereferencing have to do with this? > > We're talking about an identifier. > > _/|_ ___________________________________________________________________ > /o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk > )_v__/\ You can never go back -- only forwards, or stand still. > >