W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2010

Re: Gloss standard terminology for resource/representation (ISSUE-81 Change Proposal)

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 08:13:34 +0000 (UTC)
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1004080813100.4065@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2010, at 12:35 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
> > > This is informed by discussion with lots of people, but nobody else 
> > > has looked at it, so it's just from me.
> > 
> > Would the following be an acceptable compromise?
> > 
> > <p>What some specifications, in particular the HTTP and URI 
> > specifications, refer to as a <i>representation</i> is referred to in 
> > this specification as a <dfn title="">resource</dfn>.</p>
> 
> As a point of clarification, would you include the RFC references for 
> the HTTP and URI specs after that sentence, as alluded to below?
> 
> > > of [RFC3986].
> > 
> > The spec's style is to not use references in sentences but to use the 
> > colloquial names of the specifications and then have the reference 
> > after the sentence.

I hadn't thought about it, but sure, if people think that would be 
helpful.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 8 April 2010 08:14:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:16 UTC