4 ms·

Idea that something cool would stay cool forever sounds like oxymoron. For example, Yahoo.com has remained the URI for Yahoo's homepage and will continue to un

by nxzero 10y ago

Idea that something cool would stay cool forever sounds like oxymoron. For example, Yahoo.com has remained the URI for Yahoo's homepage and will continue to until it's the 404 page. Yahoo.com is not cool.

rimantas 10y ago
No, the idea is that URL that don't change are cool.
- nxzero 10y ago
  >> "No, [repeat idea]." Is not a meaningful response to the claims I presented. At the point that I'm able to swap two resource with another and only reason to believe that a given resource is in fact the resource I referenced is the fact that the unique identifiers are the same means it's in fact useless as an indentifier. In fact, I would claim that the whole idea of URIs as currently used is malformed, since it fails to allow a user to be able to know the resource reference is in fact the resource received.
chriswarbo 10y ago
The "cool URLs" idea doesn't (AFAIK) cover mutability and temporal issues. In 1998, "yahoo.com" referred to the homepage of Yahoo!. In 2016, "yahoo.com" still refers to the homepage of Yahoo!. The content of the page isn't the same, but it's still the same 'entity' (the homepage of Yahoo!). Hence, despite Yahoo! being uncool, and the contents of the Yahoo! homepage being uncool, the URL of the Yahoo! homepage is cool. It would be nice if URLs had a built-in capability to reference immutable versions of things, similar to git references. This is done on niche networks like IPFS (I think) and Freenet. It's easy to imagine a DNS-like layer which sends "pet names" like "yahoo.com" to the latest version, whilst leaving "raw" names alone (like DNS does for IP addresses). With that said, it would also be nice if DOM elements got their own URLs which user agents could load instead of the whole page (imagine anchors but using something like XPath). That would make hyperlinks more useful and bring us a step closer to Xanadu-like behaviour, e.g. rather than copying text from a page and wrapping it in quotation marks, you could embed that element inside (a quotation element inside) your page.
- nxzero 10y ago
  Yahoo simply naming their name might make them more cool and reflect they've changed. Have a page forever saying Yahoo is now _______ would be lame and void the point of changing their name.
coldtea 10y ago
>Idea that something cool would stay cool forever sounds like oxymoron. Oxymoron is an idea whose definition competes with itself. Nothing about coolness is against "staying forever" as such. An actual oxymoron would be that something can be a "permanent fad" (as the nature of fads is to be transient). Or that "it's cool to be uncool".

by nxzero 10y ago

rimantas 10y ago

No, the idea is that URL that don't change are cool.

nxzero 10y ago
>> "No, [repeat idea]." Is not a meaningful response to the claims I presented. At the point that I'm able to swap two resource with another and only reason to believe that a given resource is in fact the resource I referenced is the fact that the unique identifiers are the same means it's in fact useless as an indentifier. In fact, I would claim that the whole idea of URIs as currently used is malformed, since it fails to allow a user to be able to know the resource reference is in fact the resource received.

chriswarbo 10y ago

The "cool URLs" idea doesn't (AFAIK) cover mutability and temporal issues. In 1998, "yahoo.com" referred to the homepage of Yahoo!. In 2016, "yahoo.com" still refers to the homepage of Yahoo!. The content of the page isn't the same, but it's still the same 'entity' (the homepage of Yahoo!). Hence, despite Yahoo! being uncool, and the contents of the Yahoo! homepage being uncool, the URL of the Yahoo! homepage is cool. It would be nice if URLs had a built-in capability to reference immutable versions of things, similar to git references. This is done on niche networks like IPFS (I think) and Freenet. It's easy to imagine a DNS-like layer which sends "pet names" like "yahoo.com" to the latest version, whilst leaving "raw" names alone (like DNS does for IP addresses). With that said, it would also be nice if DOM elements got their own URLs which user agents could load instead of the whole page (imagine anchors but using something like XPath). That would make hyperlinks more useful and bring us a step closer to Xanadu-like behaviour, e.g. rather than copying text from a page and wrapping it in quotation marks, you could embed that element inside (a quotation element inside) your page.

nxzero 10y ago
Yahoo simply naming their name might make them more cool and reflect they've changed. Have a page forever saying Yahoo is now _______ would be lame and void the point of changing their name.

coldtea 10y ago

>Idea that something cool would stay cool forever sounds like oxymoron. Oxymoron is an idea whose definition competes with itself. Nothing about coolness is against "staying forever" as such. An actual oxymoron would be that something can be a "permanent fad" (as the nature of fads is to be transient). Or that "it's cool to be uncool".