W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2008

RE: Uniform access to descriptions

From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 20:53:34 +0000
To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
CC: "wangxiao@musc.edu" <wangxiao@musc.edu>, "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>, Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Message-ID: <184112FE564ADF4F8F9C3FA01AE50009FCF1FC42DC@G1W0486.americas.hpqcorp.net>

> From:  Alan Ruttenberg
>       So an IR is the sort of thing that can emit a response.
>
>       Which means it can't be the Microsoft Word document I
>     just worked on, since as far as I know, such things aren't
>     capable of emitting anything.
>
>       Do I have this right?

People often speak colloquially about an information resource "responding" to an HTTP GET request (or in this case "emitting" a response).  This should be understood as a shorthand for saying that the HTTP *server* responds on behalf of the "information resource" that the URI denotes.

So, if http://example/proteins.doc is dereferenced and yields a 200 response, then by the httpRange-14 rule we know:

  <http://example/proteins.doc> a awww:InformationResource .

but the following might also being true, even though the 200 response by itself did not tell you so:

  <http://example/proteins.doc> a doctypes:MicrosoftWord .
  <http://example/proteins.doc> dc:subject "proteins" .

Similarly, if http://weather.example/oaxaca is dereferenced and yields a 200 response, then by the httpRange-14 rule we know:

  <http://weather.example/oaxaca> a awww:InformationResource .

But the following may also be true:

  <http://weather.example/oaxaca>  dc:subject "weather" .
  <http://weather.example/oaxaca>  foo:location "oaxaca" .

Furthermore, we've discussed how a proposed new HTTP header, Resource-Description (or perhaps Link), could point to this additional information.  And we've discussed how such additional information can be provided using a 303-URI instead of a 200-responding URI (again, I'm speaking colloquially):
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2008Feb/0033.html

So, what's your point?



David Booth, Ph.D.
HP Software
+1 617 629 8881 office  |  dbooth@hp.com
http://www.hp.com/go/software

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not represent the official views of HP unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2008 20:55:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:55 GMT