RE: [httpRange-14] Resolved

Roy, TAG,

Many congratulations on putting this one to bed. I think the resolution
is a good one. HTTP URIs remain opaque. Positive discrimination between
information resource and any (kind-of) resource does not arise from
direct inspection of the URI.

Regards

Stuart
--

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] 
> On Behalf Of Roy T. Fielding
> Sent: 19 June 2005 05:26
> To: W3C TAG
> Subject: [httpRange-14] Resolved
> 
> 
> As everyone here knows, the TAG has spent a great deal of 
> time discussing the httpRange-14 issue, as described at
> 
>     http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#httpRange-14
> 
> I am happy to report that we came up with a reasonable 
> compromise solution at the recent TAG f2f meeting at MIT.
> 
> <TAG type="RESOLVED">
> 
> That we provide advice to the community that they may mint 
> "http" URIs for any resource provided that they follow this 
> simple rule for the sake of removing ambiguity:
> 
>    a) If an "http" resource responds to a GET request with a
>       2xx response, then the resource identified by that URI
>       is an information resource;
> 
>    b) If an "http" resource responds to a GET request with a
>       303 (See Other) response, then the resource identified
>       by that URI could be any resource;
> 
>    c) If an "http" resource responds to a GET request with a
>       4xx (error) response, then the nature of the resource
>       is unknown.
> 
> </TAG>
> 
> I believe that this solution enables people to name arbitrary 
> resources using the "http" namespace without any dependence 
> on fragment vs non-fragment URIs, while at the same time 
> providing a mechanism whereby information can be supplied via 
> the 303 redirect without leading to ambiguous interpretation 
> of such information as being a representation of the resource 
> (rather, the redirection points to a different resource in 
> the same way as an external link from one resource to the other).
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Roy T. Fielding                            <http://roy.gbiv.com/>
> Chief Scientist, Day Software              <http://www.day.com/>
> 
> 
>

Received on Monday, 20 June 2005 08:44:22 UTC