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

RE: Information resources?

From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <len.bullard@intergraph.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 15:55:16 -0500
Message-ID: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE07206693@hq1.pcmail.ingr.com>
To: 'Sandro Hawke' <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org

I agree.  The arch was trapped in the original terminology 
used to describe URLs.  It didn't prove to be 
robust past the application to dereferencing. 
Terms like 'information resource' are glue to 
improve the range of word senses.

There's not supposed to be anything weird or surprising 
in physics, but the terminology and the metaphorical 
examples lead to much spookiness.  One gets used to it.


From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
Sandro Hawke

> So after much discussion, we are back to the beginning, that is, 
> dereferencing a URI returns a document (aka, bits on the wire) 
> or doesn't?

Of course.

> Something of an anti-climax.

There's not supposed to be anything weird or surprising in WebArch.
It was supposed to be just writing down stuff that was obvious to
folks who knew how the Web was supposed to work.

Turned out to be less obvious than expected on a few points.  Getting
it back to obvious is Good Thing.

      -- sandro
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2004 20:55:49 UTC

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