Subject: RE: [xri] Editorial change: "non-resolution" to "self-reference"
Drummond, Can you describe the differences between "self-reference" and "cross-reference"? XRI syntax has these two things, the syntactical and logical differences between them aren't clear (at least to me). Thank you, =Loren > -----Original Message----- > From: Drummond Reed [mailto:email@example.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 4:00 PM > To: firstname.lastname@example.org > Subject: [xri] Editorial change: "non-resolution" to "self-reference" > > > As we continue to prepare the final working draft (now slated to be 09 > after Gabe's posting of 08 today), I'd like to put to rest a lingering > terminology issue: the term "non-resolvable". We have found numerous > times now that this term creates confusion because, as Gabe says, what > we really mean when we use it to describe an XRI is > "not-to-be-resolved". > > In other words, "non-resolvable" DOESN'T mean the XRI CAN'T > be resolved, > it simply means in this context that the purpose of the XRI is only to > determine equivalence and thus it should not be dereferenced. > > Examples: > > xri:@foo > xri:(@foo) > > The former is intended to be resolved to the resource identified by > "@foo". The latter is a way of expressing that resolution is NOT > intended, and that the XRI merely expresses "the identifier with the > value '@foo'". > > We have never disagreed that this is useful, we just haven't known > exactly what to call it. As we have written many times (and as David > Booth illustrated in his white paper about the different uses of URIs > that we cited in the XRI Requirements doc), what we intend by the term > "non-resolution" is same thing accomplished in English language by > putting a word in quotes, e.g., "the word "user-friendly" has become > commonplace in computer literature". > > It finally hit me what this really is: a self-reference. > Since the whole > purpose of an identifier is to serve as a reference to a resource, we > need special syntax - in both human and computer languages - for the > special case when we DON'T mean "the thing being identified", but > instead mean "the identifier itself", i.e., a self-reference. > > I've already begun using this term in several documents > describing this > feature of XRIs and it works like a charm - simply substitute > "self-reference" for "non-resolvability" and "self-referential" for > "non-resolvable". It works especially well because cross-reference > syntax is already a key feature of XRIs, and now we can list > self-reference syntax alongside it. > > So the formal proposal is to make the terminology substitution above > beginning with the 09 draft. Any objections, please post ASAP > - silence > will be deemed consensus. > > =Drummond > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from > the roster of the OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xri/members/leave _workgroup.php.