[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [xri] Editorial change: "non-resolution" to "self-reference"
Ah, Loren, good test. Since cross-references and self-references are two of the six key features of XRIs (along with unlimited delegation, persistence, global context symbols, and internationalization), here's how I'd describe and compare them. A cross-reference is an identifier used in the context of another identifier. The primary usage of cross references is to allow multiple authorities (contexts) to share the same identifier for the same logical resources. For example, xri:=John/(+phone.number)/(+work) and xri:=Mary/(+phone.number)/(+work) allow both John and Mary to refer to the same logical resource (their respective work phone numbers) using the same identifiers. A self-reference is an identifier used to refer to itself. The primary usage of self-references is to allow humans and computers to refer to an identifier itself rather than the resource the identifier would normally identify. For example, xri:foo refers to the resource with the relative reassignable identifier "foo", while the xri:(.foo) refers to the identifier "foo" itself and NOT the identified resource. You could say that every cross-reference is also a self-reference to the XRI contained in the cross-reference, and you'd be right (both syntactically and logically), but I'm not sure what additional cognitive value that would buy ;-) =Drummond -----Original Message----- From: Loren West [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 4:30 PM To: Drummond Reed; email@example.com 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:firstname.lastname@example.org] > Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 4:00 PM > To: email@example.com > 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.