W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2003

RE: Arch Doc: 26 September 2003 Editor's Draft

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 19:23:17 -0700
To: "'Roy T. Fielding'" <fielding@apache.org>
Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <02bf01c386f9$cfba7d30$470ba8c0@beasys.com>

It is perfectly fine in my world for PUTs resulting in HTML to be hypertext
and for results of POSTs of GetStockQuote to be considered hypertext.

As long as we are consistent with the nouns, verbs and relationships in our
document, I'm more or less ok with calling PUTs resulting in HTML the "bob"
system with a set of "glebs" existing in a "furflespace".

I do think the lay folk, and I include myself in that for this particular
definitional practice, will find the term hypertext to be broader in scope
than they expect.  We might have different expectations about the average
capabilities of the target audience.


> > While you answered a number of my earlier questions in
> various emails
> > to
> > other people, you didn't answer the question about whether
> web service
> > references, such as <callback location="mycallbackserviceuri"/> is a
> > hypertext link or a different kind of link.
> Are the contents of a successful PUT hypertext if the body is HTML,
> or does it only become hypertext after a GET?
> Answer me that and you will have your answer on the callback.
> Hint: the information space exists independent from the current
> set of agents acting upon it.  Telling a server to issue a callback
> is no different from creating a resource on the server with a
> set of trigger semantics -- it is a link for an agent to traverse.
> ....Roy
Received on Monday, 29 September 2003 22:22:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:39 UTC