W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2006

Re: REVISED Web Page Proposal - Version 2.0

From: Carlos A Velasco <Carlos.Velasco@fit.fraunhofer.de>
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 21:38:44 +0100
Message-ID: <454A5754.4090709@fit.fraunhofer.de>
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

The issue has been, by the way :-), also identified by the work in EARL,
to identify *Test Subjects*. See more in:


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:34:01 UTC