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

RE: [httpRedirections-57] Resource-Decription Header: a possible proposal to consider.

From: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) <skw@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 14:21:39 +0000
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
CC: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Message-ID: <9674EA156DA93A4F855379AABDA4A5C611950B5117@G5W0277.americas.hpqcorp.net>

Mark,

Thanks for the pointer... doesn't look like it made it into either branch of the registry... (or maybe it was in the Provisonal branch for a while... but it's not listed there now). Any idea's as to it's fate/adoption?

Thx,

Stuart
--
Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mark@coactus.com [mailto:mark@coactus.com] On Behalf Of
> Mark Baker
> Sent: 06 February 2008 13:58
> To: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
> Cc: www-tag@w3.org; Graham Klyne; Jonathan Borden
> Subject: Re: [httpRedirections-57] Resource-Decription
> Header: a possible proposal to consider.
>
> On 2/6/08, Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) <skw@hp.com> wrote:
> > The Idea:
> > ---------
> > <quote>
> > I generally agree. "Site" is one type of resource, perhaps
> its special
> > enough to get its own HTTP header (?) but why not just
> (example HTTP
> > response headers):
> >
> > Resource-Type: http://example.org/siteOntology#Site
> > Resource-Description: http://example.org/site.rdf
> >
> > would solve this problem, as well as [httpRange-14] in a
> general fashion.
> > </quote>
>
> FWIW, Resource-Type was specified here;
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Mar/att-0054/draft-palmer-resrep-type-00.txt
>
> Mark.
> --
> Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.         http://www.markbaker.ca
> Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com
>
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2008 14:24:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:52 GMT