> The http: URI scheme is indeed a very attractive scheme to use to > name resources -- because, as you point out, one can (optionally) > employ HTTP to provide access to representations of that resource. While you're on the subject, and because I know you have seriously consistent views on this: what does the word "representations" mean there? My gray understanding is the community on the whole has no consensus here, so a not-well-defined term is used. But I suspect it is well-defined for you. Try replacing "representations of" with (1) "content (MIME Entities) associated with" (2) "serializations of" I have trouble finding a consistent and useful meaning of "representation" between those two. -- sandroReceived on Friday, 23 January 2004 08:39:00 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 23 April 2007 18:20:14 GMT