- From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 21:15:47 -0400
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote: > There are two different concepts: > > XXXX: the thing that a Uniform Resource Identifier identifies, > that a Uniform Resource Locator locates. > > YYYY: the bits + metadata you get, when you "fetch" an XXXX. Your definition of XXXX suggests that there's a one-to-one correspondence between URLs and XXXXs, so why not treat them as isomorphic? Any reference to an XXXX can be reworded to refer to a URL instead. The word "resource" can then be used in more or less its normal English meaning, to talk about YYYYs. I think this is roughly what the spec has done. This usage might not accord with some other specs, but it ends up being completely precise and unambiguous taken by itself. It also uses less standards jargon, and more practical terms that anyone should understand, and at least that is a good thing.
Received on Wednesday, 7 October 2009 01:16:20 UTC