> > > > I have to say I am suspicious of schemes like PURL, which
> > > > for all their good points introduce a single point of
> > > > failure into, well, everything that uses them. That can't
> > > > be good. Especially as it's run by the same compary that
> > > > also runs the often-unavailable OpenURL registry.
> > >
> > > What you are saying is that you are suspicious of the HTTP
> > > protocol.
> > That is NOT what I am saying.
> > I am saying I am suspicious of a single point of failure.
> > Especially since the entire architecture of the Internet was
> > (rightly IMHO) designed with the goal of avoid SPOFs.
> OK, good, then if you are concerned about the PURL services SPOF,
> take the freely available PURL software and created a distributed
> PURL based system and put it up for the community.
Why would I want to do this when I could just Not Use PURLs?
Anyway, we're way off the subject now -- I guess if we want to argue
about the utility of PURL we could get a room :-)
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "The cladistic defintion of Aves is: an unimportant offshoot of
the much cooler dinosaur family which somehow managed to survive
the K/T boundry intact" -- Eric Lurio.