W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2009

Re: ISSUE-81 (resource vs representation)

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 16:36:11 -0700
Message-Id: <9952DFAA-BE61-4641-8A2A-9FCBC087D35D@gbiv.com>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
On Sep 27, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Sep 27, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Sep 27, 2009, at 14:18, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>
>>> It seems like it would be more painstakingly accurate to say "A  
>>> URL is a string used to retrieve a resource"
>>
>> I think the point of the ISSUE is that the theoretically pure view  
>> is that you can never retrieve a resource but only its  
>> representation.
>
> Right, but the particular sub-issue here is whether HTML5 uses the  
> word "resource" consistently (something I think also doesn't matter  
> very much).

It matters a great deal to me.  If you think it is going to
help progress on HTML5 for us to replay fifteen years of debate
on what a resource is for the Web, then please explain why
Ian's opinion is sufficient to contradict existing practice
on the Web, all other W3C specifications, the normative Internet
standard, my own dissertation, and the entire world-view of RDF.

HTML is not a standalone specification.  It is part of the
World Wide Web architecture.  If you don't want to standardize
within the constraints of the Web, then feel free to change the
name of the specification to something else.

....Roy
Received on Sunday, 27 September 2009 23:36:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:49 GMT