- From: Miles Sabin <miles@mistral.co.uk>
- Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 12:07:01 +0100
- To: <www-tag@w3.org>
Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote, > 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. I more or less agree, but I don't think this goes quite far enough. What you're saying here is that (without additional information), 1. The URI -> resource mapping is unique. 2. The resource -> representation mapping is ambiguous. and you want some mechanism to resolve the ambiguity in (2). This would give us, 1. The URI -> resource mapping is unique. 2'. The resource -> representation mapping is unique. But now it's very hard to see why we need the resource/representation distinction at all: any disambiguation mechanism which would work to resolve a resource -> representation ambiguity would work just as well to resolve a URI -> resource ambiguity. Given that the de facto ambiguities wrt URIs run much deeper than the resource -> representation ambiguity it seems to me that we'll get much further if we push the problem up to he URI/resource level and solve the problem there. Cheers, Miles
Received on Sunday, 31 March 2002 06:07:17 UTC