I think once again it is necessary to keep in mind the distinction between what is accessed through the URL, in other words what the URL *locates*, and what the URL does *identify*. Though URLs allow to access a *representation* of the identified resource, the nature of this resource can usually not be determined from one such representation. It seems quite handy that the URL locate both a page and meta-data about the page, depending on context negociation. After all, this example is not that different from the W3C logo [1] : one could argue that each version of the logo (PNG or GIF) is a resource by itself and deserves its own URL (it has, actually). Yet, URL [1] allows to access both, depening only on the content negociation. On the other hand, I'm not sure the distinction between data-representation and meta-data-representation realy comes under content-negociation. How could I request meta- data about some RDF document ? Or do I have to consider that any meta-data about some RDF must be self contained, since it can be ?... Not very satisfying to me... Pierre-Antoine [1] http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_main ______________________________________________________ Boîte aux lettres - Caramail - http://www.caramail.comReceived on Tuesday, 24 April 2001 09:40:00 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:49 GMT