Silvia, Michael Indeed, we haven't scribed a formal RESOLUTION regarding this choice as far as I remember, but we agree on that during the Ghent face to face meeting, as the minutes let that suppose. Further, http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Fragments/wiki/Syntax#Decisions have captured the decision. > We never really captured the decision that was made for choosing "#" > as the fragment identifying mechanism over "?". I think we will need a > brief discussion about the advantages and disadvantages of these two > approaches in the WD and an explanation of when to choose what. This > needs to be more than the one sentence written in 6.1. Absolutely! More precisely, we need to specify what's happened if the 'segment' is obtained with a hash ('#') or a question mark ('?') since out grammar is now flexible. - In the case of the '#': the single or dual step partial GET as described currently - In the case of the '?': the normal behavior, it is a new resource that will be completely served with a 200 OK response code. The only extra specification we may add is a link header to point towards the original resource the segment comes from ... I suggest to write that down in the next iteration of the WD :-) Raphaël -- Raphaël Troncy CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science), Science Park 123, 1098 XG Amsterdam, The Netherlands e-mail: raphael.troncy@cwi.nl & raphael.troncy@gmail.com Tel: +31 (0)20 - 592 4093 Fax: +31 (0)20 - 592 4312 Web: http://www.cwi.nl/~troncy/Received on Wednesday, 29 April 2009 10:32:39 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 29 April 2009 10:32:39 GMT