Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposal (nym)

DataPacRat <datapacrat@gmail.com> Thu, 27 June 2013 18:43 UTC

Return-Path: <datapacrat@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9744821F9E8E for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.599, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uD1obg3VBHby for <uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vb0-x22b.google.com (mail-vb0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c02::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F79D21F9DAB for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vb0-f43.google.com with SMTP id e12so977833vbg.30 for <uri-review@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=tC0hC3DcltynUBZ5owDQgf5IDe7uMSOQ5jjXZ0uds7E=; b=nwAUQioDctfNRWNvdx1OYtwA3y3O4N3Hgo+xIC4IWwhNp8el0mtHW7VhkfiNBVXWJ0 mfaKB0aYi2L28im9hSgROv+mnqB07AbAxFa4xd6jAmCH24ColwcgLce9tekWklpDq8O4 KOMiKtPYszENVX+LjlilTmPOh30g5kGYEx0y6eDEfFbg0Aba+XCpuXIqxkfNfn3OqurE /V2jJgqRWQMNfCnT0aLjKqpHEWeQykOtHK9TQvGO8R/U0zEOOrhpd2nrDvbinzIpZpDv M+/SSlkzUCEZ1jVHaIwkPs5nFNUjZr9JShAcxAE5OEmpk0GwU7R9nciB+N2V0XHPoH8H wg1A==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.220.17.206 with SMTP id t14mr665669vca.15.1372358609058; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.201.201 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51CC7EFF.5070405@ninebynine.org>
References: <CAB5WduCMF+HMyHPFU1bJkOcbzpyAM063XvCM-uDn2zGAoZkFEg@mail.gmail.com> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D3471E4101A@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <CAB5WduCz4nRSeMUVKnjmUNEDxzRB54khCiU2-1sqCYr1TKLSFA@mail.gmail.com> <CAB5WduAmmMkwBs5fU4Nzz1S8mTqn_oBp+7j0APSOib51OVSdTA@mail.gmail.com> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D347221DBE6@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <CAB5WduBfMNnTx1sj2C14vkZRJ+9bibxY=Ee4c6K0KwJF4FQpuw@mail.gmail.com> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D347221DC55@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <CAB5WduAWR+cxuMDfCsrs1az19=0gX10sbnkqSKnifePgD4=4Lg@mail.gmail.com> <CAB5WduCvMZWu0wLt4Lu2RLTRHtyQv77s4ymy4wtcP9e1OOxvSA@mail.gmail.com> <51CC1E33.6050701@ninebynine.org> <CAB5WduAUbnY4Trnsc41QX_mLkVHDrpB0m_-ObVxCg8gO61hfvw@mail.gmail.com> <51CC7EFF.5070405@ninebynine.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 14:43:28 -0400
Message-ID: <CAB5WduC60YbDvyWpaugXH0cBgZDi_+BJgpx26uw1Ms0JJ0iB7Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: DataPacRat <datapacrat@gmail.com>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: "uri-review@ietf.org" <uri-review@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Uri-review] Initial inquiry into URI proposal (nym)
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review>
List-Post: <mailto:uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 18:43:31 -0000

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>; wrote:
> On 27/06/2013 17:43, DataPacRat wrote:

If you don't object, I'm going to focus in on one particular point of
your reply. If that item can be cleared up, then the remainder seem
reasonably simple enough to; but if it can't, then there seems little
point in even trying to work out the rest.


>> This compares to writing up nym: as a URI of second-order referencing,

> You lost me there.  What is a "a URI of second-order referencing"?  If it's
> important, this is something that needs to be clarified, separately from all
> the issues of assertions and confidence.  It maybe that there's already some
> structure that achieves what you are trying to do, but without clear
> understanding, I can't tell.

Yet another metaphor: Back in the '80's, I played around a bit with
assembly programming of 8-bit CPUs. In general, a line of assembly
code consisted of an instruction and one or two pieces of data: "Jump
execution to this address", or "Add this number to that." This was
made much more versatile with what are called "addressing modes",
different ways of referencing a piece of data. There were complicated
variations, but most simply, there were three basic addressing modes.
There was direct addressing: "Jump to memory-entry 42"; there was
relative addressing: "Jump ahead 42 lines"; and there was indirect
addressing: "Jump to the address stored in memory-entry 42".

Most current URIs are based around direct addressing:
"http://www.twitter.com/DataPacRat" points to a particular resource.
Some current URIs allow for relative addressing:
"../different-subdirectory/file.gif". There seems to be a dearth of
ones that allow for indirect addressing: "the person described by
http://www.twitter.com/DataPacRat" or "the person shown in the picture
at ../different-subdirectory/file.gif".

What I'm trying to build with nym (one way or another, and with or
without other complications thrown in), is to have some sort of
structure that uses such indirect addressing: to take any given URI,
such as a webpage or mailto: address, and instead of referring
directly to whatever is pointed at by that URI, having the nym use
indirect addressing to be a reference to whatever that URI describes.
This seems to be within the general scope of URIs being references
that point to things, and to provide a novel form of doing so not
covered by an existing URI.


Does that provide any better clarity of this point?


Thank you for your time,
--
DataPacRat
"A little learning is not a dangerous thing to one who does not
mistake it for a great deal." -- William A White