W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > July to September 1998

Re: Direct References in the Advanced Collections Requiremen

From: Jim Amsden <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 11:08:36 -0400
To: <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5040100022664299000002L092*@MHS>
Reading through a reference to the target or not has nothing to do with client
and server or communication for that matter. Either party in the communication
might want to do both at one time or another.





w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org on 09/18/98 04:44:11 PM
Please respond to w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
cc:
Subject: Re: Direct References in the Advanced Collections Requiremen

"Slein, Judith A" wrote:

> We are still wrestling with the terminology for this distinction.  I've had
> objections in private correspondence to Client-Side / Server-Side, because
> they seem to imply something about the location of the requester that
> irrelevant to the distinction we are trying to make.

I disagree on this point, actually; in the HTTP conversation, the entity
issuing the request is the client by definition, regardless of where that
entity is running.

> Or stick with Indirect Reference / Direct Reference

I still prefer these two, myself; I'd go along with Client-Side/Server-Side,
but the others seem too contrived.

--
/====================================================================\
|John (Francis) Stracke    |My opinions are my own.|S/MIME supported |
|Software Retrophrenologist|=========================================|
|Netscape Comm. Corp.      | Organ transplants are best left to the  |
|francis@netscape.com      |  professionals.                         |
\====================================================================/
New area code for work number: 650
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 1998 11:04:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:47 GMT