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

Re: Historical - Re: Proposed IETF/W3C task force: "Resource meaning" Review of new HTTPbis text for 303 See Other

From: Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 21:50:18 -0400
Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, W3C TAG <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-Id: <47EEAEEA-A58A-4C23-A87E-D930E38179F6@la-grange.net>
To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>

Le 2 août 2009 à 15:48, Tim Berners-Lee a écrit :
> On 2009-08 -02, at 07:04, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
>> If you were to go in that direction, I think you ought to consider
>> adding "Service" as a third category. Thing at the top, with the
>> children document and service disjoint (not a complete partition,
>> obviously).
[…]
> Yes, I agree adding Service would help relieve some confusion. I  
> deliberately avoided it in the short history. There is a use in some  
> ways for an ontology which ignores POST services completely, as many  
> systems are just buil;t by making webs.


This gives me the feeling of  the tree hidding the forest. HTTP gives  
a very simple set of words (GET, PUT, POST, DELETE, …) to deal with an  
information space. These words are being abused in many ways. (Julia  
Kristeva, poetic language and intertextuality?)

Basically we are adding a layer of meaning by fragmenting a generic  
meaning: From "Resource" to "Document, Thing and Service". It seems  
like going from abstract to more defined material things. This might  
help momentarily but will just push the limit to the next iteration of  
"abuse", the next layer of fragmentation.



-- 
Karl Dubost
Montréal, QC, Canada
http://twitter.com/karlpro
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 01:51:19 GMT

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