W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > August 2009

Re: Review of new HTTPbis text for 303 See Other

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 08:54:02 -0500
Cc: "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <14379390-F550-4A26-8C28-62086AB8FF09@ihmc.us>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

On Jul 31, 2009, at 3:41 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Pat Hayes wrote:
>> ...
>> hope I do not misrepresent anyone here.) Apparently, therefore, two  
>> people both quite expert in reading the HTTP spec do not interpret  
>> the phrase "requested resource" in the same way, leaving me and I  
>> suspect others in a state of complete confusion. ...
>
> We have multiple issues open with respect to cleaning up that  
> terminology. I would recommend to delay any new discussion until  
> we're done with that (which *should* be the -08 versions of the  
> drafts).

OK, great. Sorry if my insistence on this point has caused needless  
feather ruffling. For the record, let me outline the case that raises  
the central issue. No need to reply.

1.   http://example.com:8080/people/richard_cyganiak  identifies  
Richard Cygniak, the actual human being.
2.   A GET request on http://example.com:8080/people/richard_cyganiak   
resolves to some HTTP endpoint (server, whatever; I'm not sure of the  
right terminology here. I mean, the network entity which functionally  
handles the request and emits an HTTP response, and whose behavior is  
governed by the HTTP specs. I gather that this may not be identical  
with the http:resource (information resource) associated with it: the  
latter may lie just behind the endpoint, which constitutes an  
"interface" to it. (?))
3.  There is an information resource, R, at this endpoint. (Again, I'm  
not sure of the right terminology. By R I mean a thing which has a  
transmittable representation in the sense of the HTTP specs, so that  
it is possible for the endpoint to send a 200-coded response to a GET  
request with a URI which identifies R.)
4. To emphasize, this means that there are two resources in the  
picture: Richard Cygniak, who is not an information resource or an  
http:resource (with the current wording, ie a network object or  
service) and has no transmittable represetnation; and R, which falls  
under both categories, and does have a transmittable representation.  
The URI identifies the first and resolves to (an endpoint interfaced  
to) the second.

OK, so now the questions that need to be resolved are (at least :-):

A. Is this possible? (If not, how is it to be prohibited, since owners  
of URIs can, it seems, set up such a situation.)
B. Under these circumstances, is the "requested resource" R, or is it  
Richard Cygniak? (If the former, what is the relationship, if any,  
between the 'requested' resource and the 'identified' resource?)
C. Does http-range-14 require that the endpoint emit a 303 response  
under these circumstances? (If the answer is no, then some explanation  
is needed.)

Pat
Received on Sunday, 2 August 2009 13:55:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:15 GMT