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

RE: The range of the HTTP dereference function

From: Miles Sabin <miles@mistral.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 12:07:01 +0100
To: <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000301c1d8a4$2edcc120$a3eab8c3@milessabin.com>
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 GMT

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