- From: Carlos A Velasco <Carlos.Velasco@fit.fraunhofer.de>
- Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 21:38:44 +0100
- To: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Cc: 'Jason White' <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Hi Gregg, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote: > Jason is correct. > > What was proposed was: > > Anything that is invoked by the primary resource is part of the web page. > > If there are multiple primary resources that can be obtained by content > negotiation from a URI - then each would be a web page. In conformance we > say that if negotiation fails then the accessible version would be served. > > If there are arguments in the URI then it is a different URI (e.g. > example.com/pagename?xx=yy ) Of course, that is already in the definition of URI (BTW, that is a GET, not a POST, which is the issue Johannes posted in his previous email; in POST requests, the URI is the same, only the HTTP request changes). I think the issue that is eluded here like the pest, is that *a URI is not enough to identify any Web Page or Web Unit*, or whatever you want to call it. We have posted several problematic examples in the past with no reply. The issue has been, by the way :-), also identified by the work in EARL, to identify *Test Subjects*. See more in: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/WD-HTTP-in-RDF-20060705> regards, carlos -- Dr Carlos A Velasco - http://access.fit.fraunhofer.de/ Fraunhofer-Institut für Angewandte Informationstechnik FIT [Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology (FIT)] Barrierefreie Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologie für Alle Schloss Birlinghoven, D53757 Sankt Augustin (Germany) Tel: +49-2241-142609 Fax: +49-2241-1442609
Received on Thursday, 2 November 2006 20:39:11 UTC