[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xri] RE: Single delegation character
Yes, I agree that @idcommons/fen and @idcommons*fen could be defined to be equivalent, but we have a real reason that we want then to be different. The ability to explicitly state that @idcommons*fen is an authority delegated to fen and @idcommons/fen is stuff @idcommons knows about fen enables a useful differentiation. This still leaves the door open for some communities to define that e.g., @epok/loren defines an authority loren delegated by epok, but that's a choice up to the community. I'd rather not make it in the syntax. Fen Loren West wrote: > Actually, @idcommons/fen is anything @idcommons wants it to > be - including a delegation to a different endpoint that > fen has control over. > > It could work the same as @idcommons*fen. I believe a user > given this option will choose it over bang or splat, and > it would be a shame if you're conducting a survey to leave > it out. > > The XRI specification says nothing about what @idcommons/fen > means, and very little about what @idcommons*fen means > other than it's a delegated means of obtaining an endpoint. > > It specifically excludes the concept of identity, or what > one identity knows about another identity, or who owns what, > or where control lies. > > =Loren > @idcommons*Loren > @idcommons/Loren > > The above examples may point to 3 different places, or to > the same place. There isn't any expression that I have > control of any of these places. > > I believe that as soon as you express that information within > an identifier you get yourself into trouble. It's complex > information, and changes at a different rate than the > identifier (which means it de-stabilizes the identifier > when it changes). > > It's meta-data about the resource pointed to by the > identifier, and outside the scope of this TC. > > =Loren > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fen Labalme [mailto:fen@idcommons.org] > Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 3:17 PM > To: Loren West > Cc: xri@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [xri] RE: Single delegation character > > > Loren West wrote: > >>Fen - while you're at it, you should try asking if they prefer >>@idcommons/fen to either of the above. That works regardless >>of the change to the spec (if any). > > > No, Loren - it doesn't work. Unless we make / the delegation character > ( which I think would be a very bad idea). @idcommons/fen is what > idcommons authority knows about fen, as opposed to @idcommons!fen in > which idcommons delegates to the fen authority, which is what we want. > > >>I prefer bang over splat, and admit to printing a "bang name" >>on my business card in the past. > > > Yeah, I had one, too. 1982 or so. I kinda like bang, too, but I'm a > geek. I'm looking forward to this weekend (survey) to kind out what > normal people think. > > =Fen >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]