W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2002

Re: The range of the HTTP dereference function

From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@rbii.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 02:48:24 -0500
Message-Id: <200203310740.g2V7emw17009@joat.prv.ri.meganet.net>
To: <www-tag@w3.org>
On Sunday 31 March 2002 12:50 am, Larry Masinter wrote:
> # You could argue that the implied contract here is outside the
> scope of # the architecture, but at some point there is a *need* to
> represent a # given resource with a particular set of bits, if only
> for reification # so you can discuss the properties of that
> representation.
>
> HTTP uses ETag for this, specifically so that caching can be
> managed.

Right... the point is that there's no way, given *just* a URI, to 
guarantee that a resource has but a single given representation. There 
are cases where this is obviously less than perfect. Ideally, there'd 
be something akin to Etag standardized for use in URI's. 

> URIs weren't designed to be the basis for knowledge representation,
> so the attempts to use them for such a purpose aren't very
> successful.

That's an orthoganal issue to the issue of identity raised above.
Received on Sunday, 31 March 2002 02:51:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:05 GMT