Ross Singer writes: > Ray, you are absolutely right. These would be bad identifiers. But > let's say they're all identical (which I think is what you're saying, > right?), then this just strengthens the case for indirection through a > service like purl.org. Then it doesn't *matter* that all of these are > different locations, there is one URI that represent the concept of > what is being kept at these locations. At the end of the redirect can > be some sort of 300 response that lets the client pick which endpoint > is right for them -or arbitrarily chooses one for them. 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. _/|_ ___________________________________________________________________ /o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk )_v__/\ "I don't really think that the end can be assessed as of itself, as being the end, because what does the end feel like? It's like trying to extrapolate the end of the universe. lf the universe is indeed infinite, then what does that mean? How far is all the way? And then if it stops, what's stopping it and what's behind what's stopping it? So 'What is the end?' is my question to you" -- David St. Hubbins, _This Is Spinal Tap_.