W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2004

Re: referendum on httpRange-14 (was RE: "information resource")

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:53:58 +0200
Message-ID: <145553552.20041029175358@w3.org>
To: Stuart Williams <skw@hp.com>
Cc: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>

On Friday, October 29, 2004, 11:23:30 AM, Stuart wrote:


SW> Joshua Allen wrote:

>>Can't people just mint a URI to stand in for a literal, if they want to
>>assert about that literal?


SW>     data:text/plain,some%20percent%20escaped%20literal%20value

SW> Seems a bit ugly... and has probably been suggested before.


With the proviso that I would prefer

data:text/plain;charset="utf-8",some%20percent%20escaped%20literal%20value

It seems a perfectly fine way to define a literal. Its also a URI, its
moderately compact, the network performance is very good :) it has a
defined media type, its clear exactly what the representation is, its
clear that its always available and does not vary by media type,
referer, time of day, etc.



-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Friday, 29 October 2004 15:53:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:43 UTC