> a URL isn't simply an address; it is a path, and this makes all the difference.
I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that a URL is a path. A path implies a route from A to B. When I share a URL with you, I imply no path.
> A p.o. address, for example, may tell you how to get to someone's apartment but it wouldn't tell you how to get up there if the front door is locked.
You began your comment with the words FUD, so I'd like to add two of my own - Red Herring!
If you must use analogies, the physical equivalent of a URL is an address, not a P.O. box. But I suspect you still chose the P.O. box analogy because it allows you to create the false construct of a locked front door.
The availability of digital resources at a public URL is equivalent to the availability of physical resources at an address. The "locked front door" is irrelevant in both these (limiting) examples.
I think a url is both an address and a path. The domain is clearly the address of the server (residence), where the 'path' applies to. You can even construct a path in many cases that includes a password to grant entry to an otherwise protected resource, which is no different from giving someone a key to get in the door.
I don't like that interpretation, because i feel it's important that linking remains legal in most crcumstances, if not all, but that doesn't change the fact that if you reason by analogy to the physical world most url's are indeed paths. And this is where the danger is: reasoning by analogy. It doesn't produce good results to reason about dgital resources by analogy to physical resources.
At the risk of prolonging an unnecessary digression (the analogy was brought up by the parent), I still don't believe a public URL in itself contains a path. In fact it's quite possible that some URLs may never lead to a valid path depending on the starting address. Paths are only inferred or drawn up during traversal.
I wouldn't mind being proven wrong though, preferably with an example.
Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs, aka URLs) are short strings that identify resources in the web: documents, images, downloadable files, services, electronic mailboxes, and other resources. They make resources available under a variety of naming schemes and access methods such as HTTP, FTP, and Internet mail addressable in the same simple way. They reduce the tedium of "log in to this server, then issue this magic command ..." down to a single click.
I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that a URL is a path. A path implies a route from A to B. When I share a URL with you, I imply no path.
> A p.o. address, for example, may tell you how to get to someone's apartment but it wouldn't tell you how to get up there if the front door is locked.
You began your comment with the words FUD, so I'd like to add two of my own - Red Herring!
If you must use analogies, the physical equivalent of a URL is an address, not a P.O. box. But I suspect you still chose the P.O. box analogy because it allows you to create the false construct of a locked front door.
The availability of digital resources at a public URL is equivalent to the availability of physical resources at an address. The "locked front door" is irrelevant in both these (limiting) examples.