> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 11:58 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] resolution and identification (was Re:
> [CODE4LIB] registering info: uris?)
> I realize this is pretty much a dead-end debate as everyone has dug
> themselves into a position and nobody is going to change their mind. It
> is a
> philosophical debate and there isn't a right answer. But in my opinion
Often it is portrayed as a philosophical debate, but it's about standards.
Nothing in RFC 3986 says that any URI scheme should be made or is
resolvable. A URI with an HTTP scheme is just as good as a URI with any
other scheme. URIs are just identification tokens. Resolvability or
dereference is about the use of URI.
> Why? Because it drives me nuts to see http URIs everywhere that give
> all appearances of resolvability - browsers, editors, etc. turn them
> into clickable links.
This happens with info URIs too. Show a person an info URI an tell them
that itís a URI, and they might swipe the text and try to resolve it in
their favorite browser. It doesn't help when there browser spits back
"unknown URI scheme". They will probably just go off an Goggle it.
The argument that info URIs are not resolvable, just doesn't mean that
someone will not try to resolve it in their browser. Resolvability,
like persistence, is a policy statement about a URI.