Re: AWWSW telecon 13 October 2009

I have to send regrets for today, very sorry. Due to proposal writing I have
not so far and I will not be able to contribute much in the next two weeks.
The target document in the TAG space is now available [1] (thanks to
Jonathan and the great W3C team for the access) and I've updated our Wiki
page [2] with some further links and ideas.

Cheers,
      Michael

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/awwsw/http-semantics-report.html
[2] http://esw.w3.org/topic/AwwswHome/DraftReport

-- 
Dr. Michael Hausenblas
LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
http://sw-app.org/about.html



> From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:29:25 -0400
> To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
> Cc: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
> Subject: AWWSW telecon 13 October 2009
> Resent-From: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
> Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:29:59 +0000
> 
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:12 PM,  <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote:
>> Jonathan
>> 
>>        Are we meeting again tomorrow, and if so, at what time?
>> Sorry, this doesn't seem to be written down anywhere!
> 
> I hadn't sent an announcement yet, my bad. Been busy. 9am EDT, usual place.
> 
> I haven't made much progress, but it's probably worth a brief checkin
> and action item review.
> 
> If we have nothing else, one thing I've been wanting to talk about is this:
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-07 :
> 
>   The semantics
>    are that the identified resource is located at the server listening
>    for TCP connections on that port of that host...
> 
> and this:
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-07#section-8.3.8 :
> 
>    The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI.
> 
> My question is what semantics can be imputed to "located at" and
> "resides under". Or are they so vague that we should just say
> cafeteria-style what one might *choose* to understand by these. Or do
> we ask HTTPbis to fix them somehow? They seem to be at odds with what
> HTTPbis says about 303+GET.
>

Received on Tuesday, 13 October 2009 08:36:01 UTC