- From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 17:09:48 -0800
- To: "'Roy T. Fielding'" <fielding@gbiv.com>, "'Graham Klyne'" <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Cc: "'Williams, Stuart'" <skw@hp.com>, uri@w3.org
> I think what Stuart is noting is that a fragment is also not passed > for PUT or POST or any other action on the URI via HTTP. I am still > thinking of a way to rephrase it. Perhaps what it should say is that > the fragment is not passed to another system upon dereference of the > URI? I think that the important bit is that the fragment identifier is not used in the scheme-specific processing of the URI. Whether or not you pass the fragment to "another system" upon dereference may depend on your entire dereference mechanism (e.g., you _could_ pass the fragment along as a hint if you had a pipeline that was deciding which embedded images to pre-fetch in the next step of the pipeline). Larry
Received on Monday, 23 February 2004 20:10:19 UTC