> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:17:36 +0000
> From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
> Should Profiles be required to have their own URI identifier, rather than
> just a short name?
> Eg: http://srw.cheshire3.org/profiles/ccg/1.0/ vs 'ccg'
Oh damn. Yes, we need URIs.
> So, after all that, I'm in favor of having just a URI to identify a
> profile, rather than a short name or short name + uri.
I think I agree. It'll still be _called_ "the CCG profile" when
people talk about it, but there's no need to enshrine that name in
I guess I'll go and make up some URIs for the Bath and Zthes profiles.
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "MINIX costs $169, but the license allows making two backup
copies, so the effective price can be under $60" -- Andy
Listen to my wife's new CD of kids' music, _Child's Play_, at