W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > November 2006

Re[4]: AW: Content negotiation flamewar (was: Re: "Hash URIs" and content negotiation)

From: Max Voelkel <voelkel@fzi.de>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 14:52:47 +0100
Message-ID: <685524667.20061114145247@fzi.de>
To: 'Semantic Web' <semantic-web@w3.org>

> It is interesting from the discussion that it seems that the 303 response
> pattern is applicable to only a subset of HTTP URIs.  HTTP URI with the
> fragement identifier shouldn't and cannot comply.

> Then what about the HTTP
> URIs with query parameters? Should http://example.com/resources?name=bob
> uses a 303 or not? I guess it would be yes?  But why?
For web architecture,
"http://example.com/resources?name=bob"  is  a  single  string,  if  it contains
questions  marks or not is not important. Only the # is a special characters, as
de  dereferencing  process  defines,  that  only  the part preceeding the # will
beused for dereferencing.

> I assume that a namespace document is an information resource. (At least
> from what I just checked, the rdf namespace comes back a 200). It is both
> interesting and confusing to think that a "fragment" of an information
> document can be a non-information resource. I know that I am playing the
> word "fragment", but somethings seems peculiar here about the demarcation of
> IR vs non-IR.  Is the distinction arbitrary, i.e., derived from the
> specifications, or is it a reflection of the real world?

The  web  models  information  as  resources.  Eac hresource has a URI. Fragment
identifiers  can  point to parts of REPRESENTATIONS - not to parts of resources.
representations   are  content-type dependent, i.e. what the requestor asks for.
So  a  fragment  of a content type is only defined for certain content types. In
HTML, the only definition is that a user agent is supposed to scroll down (maybe
that's not even defined).

Kind Regards,
Max
--
Max Völkel (http://Xam.de)
Forschungszentrum Informatik (fzi.de)
job: +49 721 9654-854 | mobil: +49 171 8359678
Received on Tuesday, 14 November 2006 13:53:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:12 GMT