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

RE: Question about the On Linking Alternative Representations TAG Finding

From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 16:55:46 +0000
To: T.V Raman <raman@google.com>
CC: "richard@cyganiak.de" <richard@cyganiak.de>, "seb@serialseb.com" <seb@serialseb.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, "kidehen@openlinksw.com" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "tthibodeau@openlinksw.com" <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
Message-ID: <184112FE564ADF4F8F9C3FA01AE50009FCFC889782@G1W0486.americas.hpqcorp.net>


> From: T.V Raman [mailto:raman@google.com]
>
> I think splitting hairs between resource
> and representation only works "so far".

The distinction between "representation" and "resource" is not splitting hairs, it is fundamental: they are different *roles* in the architecture.  Since anything can be a resource, a particular representation (returned in respnose to a particular request at a particular time) *could* also be considered a resource, but that just means that that particular representation can play both roles.  It does not mean that the distinction between the representation and resource is unimportant.

A representation is what you get *from* a resource -- in particular an information resource -- when you ask for one (such as by HTTP GET).

I think it's important be careful in the use of these terms, because using them incorrectly tends to cause muddled discussion and confusion.




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

Statements made herein represent the views of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of HP unless explicitly so stated.
Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2008 16:57:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:56:19 GMT