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

Re: ISSUE-81 (resource vs representation)

From: Nikunj R. Mehta <nikunj.mehta@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:21:19 -0700
Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-Id: <8DBBE919-0A2D-4625-AF94-D4DC7A827BDE@oracle.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>

On Sep 28, 2009, at 12:18 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Mon, 28 Sep 2009, Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
>> On Sep 27, 2009, at 11:35 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> On Sun, 27 Sep 2009, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>>
>>> RFC2616's terminology is more abstract than is useful for most Web
>>> developers, and therefore this kind of terminology confuses people.
>>
>> Can you provide evidence to back your claim? I am specifically  
>> referring
>> to your claim about confusion caused by "resource" as "a thing that
>> sends bits upon request".
>
> No, unfortunately, as noted earlier in this thread, I have no  
> conclusive
> evidence either way.

Then may I request you to not create a new vocabulary for everyone to  
agree with? If we don't have evidence to the contrary, it appears  
incorrect to change terminology because we don't know if that change  
is for better or worse.

Nikunj
http://o-micron.blogspot.com
Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 19:24:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:08 UTC