- From: Conrad Parker <conrad@metadecks.org>
- Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 13:08:25 +0900
- To: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
- Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
2009/5/7 Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>: > On Wed, 6 May 2009, David Singer wrote: >> At 3:55 -0400 6/05/09, Yves Lafon wrote: >>> >>> In fact if "?" is needed, our fragment syntax is just a hint, people >>> owning their URIs can define whatever naming scheme they want, the main >>> issue is finding the association between identification of useful ranges >>> someone awnts to retrieve and URIs >> >> There is a very big difference between ? and #. "?" is an instruction to >> the server; a database query, for example. It is part of the definition of >> the resource. # is an instruction to the user-agent, a focusing >> instruction. > > The server can interpet is in the way it wants, it is usually linked to cgi > or db query, but it doesn't have to be the case; but my point was that we > can't mandate the structure of what goes after a '?' in a URI, while with > the '#', as it is targeted to the client (as you said), and we want the > client to behave in a defined way, then we have the right to mandate a > specific syntax. We can specify a negotiated request/response behaviour that is used for a resource involving '?', and we can also specify a syntax for clients to use to generate URIs for such servers, post-negotiation. That we cannot mandate the behaviour for all clients and servers simply means that we should provide useful fallbacks if either the client or server behave as for a normal HTTP GET. Conrad.
Received on Thursday, 7 May 2009 04:09:07 UTC