W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Content Sniffing impact on HTTPbis - #155

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 19:43:00 +0000 (UTC)
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0906131941330.16244@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
> > ...
> > > Separately, as an editorial comment, as listed directly above, I'd like to
> > > see a big s/resource/resource representation/g (or just
> > > s/resource/representation/g as the resource is what is identified by the
> > > URI, not the bag-o-bits returned in an HTTP response.  I have some other
> > > editorial comments too, but those will have to wait until I have time to
> > > write them down.
> > 
> > A resource is a bag of bits. I would object to this change.
> 
> Mark is correct. Please use terminology consistent with other IETF specs.

In this particular case, I really would encourage the use of terms people 
understand. In any case, the term "resource" is correct when refering to a 
file, stream, or other "bag of bits". The terminology used by HTTP in this 
instance is inconsistent with wider usage (and remarkably confusing).

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 13 June 2009 19:43:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:03 GMT