>
> The URLs you're proposing here just *are* logical names, and they
> aren't in most cases being dereferenced to produce resources, which is
> the core point of URLs on the web. They're just inconvenient logical
> names.
>
>
No. In my hypothetical scenario they are simply URLs which when
dereferenced produce the required source code. They are "cannonical", in a
sense, and can be remapped to other URLs, but they are URLs, nonetheless.
You have not demonstrated that a URL-based semantics would not work. Only
that "Sam doesn't like it". But I thought that was one of the original
design goals of the module loaders API: to allow users to apply whatever
arbitrary URL resolution semantics they like.
More to follow...
{ Kevin }
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
