W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-awwsw@w3.org > June 2009

RE: Are generic resources intentional?

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:21:56 -0400
To: "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>
Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, "noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1244650916.3705.107.camel@dbooth-laptop>
On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 12:50 +0000, Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
wrote:
> David,
> 
> I think the point of Alan's question is not so much about whether the
> file (and hence its representations) can be subject to change, but
> about whether its is the file itself[*] that is the responding entity
> or the thing (filing system) that acts as its container.

Right, and part of the point of my response (though I guess I didn't
make it very clear) was that there is no architectural relevance to the
file itself.  It only matters (architecturally) to the extent that (as
Pat described in a separate message) it is "incorporated into something
larger that CAN respond to a transfer protocol request".  So if it is
indeed hosted on the web like this then it becomes relevant to the
architecture and we can think of it as being a partially constant
function, either from time and requests to representations or from time
to sets of representations.


-- 
David Booth, Ph.D.
Cleveland Clinic (contractor)

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of Cleveland Clinic.
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 16:22:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 10 June 2009 16:22:30 GMT