The question is relevant insofar as uri’s are more and more being used as identifiers for things. I.e. I could say http://www.marcdegraauw.com/eiffeltower identifies the Eiffel Tower. The relevance is the potential clash between the uri-as-identifier and uri-as-address. If the uri-as-address identifies something (like a ‘point’ n a ’space’) there is potential confusion. If uri-as-address does not identify anything by itself, there is no confusion.

See the TAG issue http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#httpRange-14

As for your second point, I guess probably any language could be mapped to some suitable space and in that sense grammatical expressions could be viewed as addresses. My note above though is more an exploration of the common use of the word ‘address’ and it’s semantical connotations, and not an exploration of more abstract uses of the word ‘address’.

Suppose you have some (mathematical) space in whitch the elements are related to each other. (e.g. metric space)further more ther is a grammar foo some “language”.
If the sentences in the language refer to the elements in the space and grammatical properties resemble (are isomorphic with) the mathematical properties, would that be adresses?

“‘The White House’ is a name, not an address, right?”

Right, I was inspired by an actual Dutch example. In the 70’s, one of the players in the national football team, Willem van Hanegem, was known by a nickname, ‘De Kromme’ (’The Curved’). It was rumored that he received a postcard from abroad addressed to ‘De Kromme, Holland’. Which proves that well-known names can function as addresses.

“I also think you leave out one crucial feature of addresses: that they in some sense address a location by specifying its position. So not only are addresses not opaque, but they also in some sense provide directions on ‘how to get there’.”

True. I do write “Addresses contain a system of directions, often but not always, hierarchical.” There was more like this in the draft, I must have polished it away.

“Other than that I think you are spot on.”

Thank you.

“And links to information on the theories on the semantics of names would be very welcome.”

You should get a copy of Frege’s ‘Ueber Sinn and Bedeutung’ (’On Sense and Reference’, also available on the Web) and Kripke’s ‘Naming and necessity’. Both aren’t too long and quote understandable. Those not willing to dig that deep can search Wikipedia, their material on both philosophers is quite good.

I also think you leave out one crucial feature of addresses: that they in some sense address a location by specifying its position. So not only are addresses not opaque, but they also in some sense provide directions on “how to get there”.

Other than that I think you are spot on. And links to information on the theories on the semantics of names would be very welcome.