Martin Swany wrote:
I don't agree that untyped, flat identifiers are more flexible. In our scheme, the opaque version could be: domain=glif.is, id=2678
But one could also have domain=glif.is, gole=foo domain=glif.is, node=rembrandt domain=glif, subdomain=something
The attributed syntax allows you more flexibility to encode semantic info.
No it is less flexible. Consider: path identifier glif.is:2678 glif.is:2678 node rembrandt (Two statements) And: path identifier "domain=glif.is, node=rembrandt" In the second case, if the node changes (while the path remains), the identifier has to change as well. In the first case, the identifier can remain the same, while a property of the path changes. Therefor, the first solution is more flexible. Regards, Freek