W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > January 2010

Re: non-HTTP URIs in HTTP requests

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:38:52 -0500
To: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
Cc: Jan Algermissen <algermissen1971@mac.com>, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, mark@coactus.com, "uri@w3.org" <uri@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFD6D563D8.86B66771-ON852576A4.0080F81F-852576A4.00818F82@lotus.com>
Erik Wilde writes:

> so you're interpretation of http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/
> httpRange-14/2007-05-31/HttpRange-14 is that it applies to any URI? 

I'm not sure that my interpretation is what matters here, but FWIW: yes, 
it applies to any URI.  First of all, the original httpRange-14 issue [1] 
was "What is the range of the HTTP dereference function?", and there's 
essentially no mention of URI schems.

The document you point to is a draft TAG finding that has no status as a 
best practice or recommendation from the TAG, but FWIW the meat of what it 
says is, IMO, in section 4.1 [2].  I think you'll find that the discussion 
there is pretty much all about the HTTP protocol, and the definition of 
the status codes, and I happen to agree that the status code definitions 
are what's important here.  Quoting from the draft finding:

Response Code 200
According to the HTTP specification, when a code of 200 is received in 
response to an HTTP GET request, it indicates that "an entity 
corresponding to the requested resource" has been returned in the 
response. The contents of this entity is what we understand as a 
representation of the resource. This correspondence between a resource and 
a representation is defined in [AWWW] as characterising an information 
resource. Consequently, we can assume that if we receive this particular 
response code in response to an HTTP GET request, we have also received a 
representation and that the URI references an information resource. 

So, to the extent you take [2] as representative of the TAG's position on 
httpRange-14, it is grounded in the definition of HTTP status code 200, 
the semantics of which are independent of URI scheme.  If you're returning 
a 200, you're saying that the "entity corresponds to the resource", and I 
think it's fair to say that's what the TAG says can't be the cases for 
resources that aren't information resources.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#httpRange-14

Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
01/07/2010 04:57 PM
        To:     noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
        cc:     Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Jan Algermissen 
<algermissen1971@mac.com>, mark@coactus.com, "uri@w3.org" <uri@w3.org>
        Subject:        Re: non-HTTP URIs in HTTP requests


noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:
> I still think it's 
> unlikely that, per httpRange-14 resolution, 200 responses will be 
> appropriate for geo-scheme URIs.

so you're interpretation of 
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/httpRange-14/2007-05-31/HttpRange-14 is 
that it applies to any URI? the title "Dereferencing HTTP URIs" to me 
suggests it doesn't, and it's mostly a document for the semweb world 
where people wanted to have a well-defined way of how to use HTTP URIs 
for ease of implementation, without sacrificing the guarantee that 
everything can be accessed via HTTP. my view of that document is that it 
only applies to HTTP URIs, but i don't think it clearly says what it is 


Received on Thursday, 7 January 2010 23:36:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:13 UTC