W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > May 2007

Re: New draft TAG Finding on The Self-Describing Web

From: Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 14:50:17 -0400
Message-ID: <465DC769.8020506@musc.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
CC: www-tag@w3.org


> I think the core of the concept "information resource" is that it's
> a resource that we are willing to identify with its representations.
> A facsimile of the First Folio, or even a faithful textual transcription,
> just *is* the First Folio, as much so as any of the 40-odd surviving
> printed copies; but nobody would think that a picture of Shakespeare
> really *is* Shakespeare, although it's certainly a representation of him.
>   
Is a picture of Shakespeare a "representation" or a "description" of 
him? IMHO, the essential difference between an information resource and 
a non-information resource is only the former can have a 
"representation" in the web.

What I found a bit of troubling about the draft is this paragraph

"Note that the above wording takes account of the fact that HTTP 
headers, such as Content-Type, are considered to be part of the resource 
representation, even though they are not part of the HTML entity-body 
content; indeed, ...."

This seems to tie a resource tightly to a network protocol.  Should a 
HTTP resource be "dereferenced" via another protocol, say FTP, their 
representation would be different by the above wording. Headers are 
metadata about the representation and should not be considered to be 
part of the representation.

Xiaoshu
Received on Wednesday, 30 May 2007 18:50:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:45 GMT