W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2007

POWDER: URIs or resources (2)

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:03:23 +0000
Message-ID: <476681AB.9020100@hpl.hp.com>
To: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
CC: www-archive@w3.org, "Carroll, Jeremy John" <jeremy.carroll@hp.com>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>

Continuing along the same lines ...

foo.example.com/bar  corresponds to bar.example.com

and

bar.example.com/foo corresponds to foo.example.com

So that we may hope that



<wdr:ResourceSet>
   <wdr:includeHosts>bar.example.com</wdr:includeHosts>
   <wdr:excludePathStartsWith>/foo</wdr:excludePathStartsWith>
</wdr:ResourceSet>

Would exclude resources from foo.example.com

But if we think about
http://foo.example.com/ alias http://bar.example.com/foo

it matches the includeHosts constraint, by virtue of the second URI, and 
it matches the excludePathStartsWith constraint by virute of the first URI.


However, any 'reasonable' implementation, would take the first URI and 
reject it, because it doesn't match the first constraint; and then take 
the second URI and reject it because it doesn't match the second constraint.

Thus I am wondering whether the constraints should be seen as 
constraints on URIs (not on resources), with the wdr:hasScope property 
doing some magic relating resources to their URIs.

http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-powder-dr-20070925/#structure

Jeremy
Received on Monday, 17 December 2007 14:04:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:12 GMT