W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2010

Re: ACTION-434: Some notes on organizing discussion on WebApps architecture

From: ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 16:06:32 -0700
Message-ID: <4CB78CF8.6030100@oracle.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
CC: John Kemp <john@jkemp.net>, "Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group" <Daniel.Appelquist@vodafone.com>, "jar@creativecommons.org" <jar@creativecommons.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
  Yes, I agree:

But, a picky point, if you add a fragId to a URL is it the same URL?  I think we need to argue that it is.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'server parts'.

This is a good point to make and goes with your earlier comment about 'only some states need to be saved in a replicable manner.  I'm happy to add this to the next version on the Saving Client State writeup.

All the best, Ashok

On 10/14/2010 2:46 PM, Larry Masinter wrote:
> I agree about being explicit...
>
> I think the design choice between using cookies and using URI annotations
> (query parameters or fragment identifiers or path or even server parts
> of the identifier) should be, in the best designs, that the URI annotations
> identify those elements of the application state that make sense to
> save and restore at a later time, or to communicate to a third party.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> Larry
> --
> http://larry.masinter.net
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ashok malhotra [mailto:ashok.malhotra@oracle.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 2:38 PM
> To: Larry Masinter
> Cc: John Kemp; Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group; jar@creativecommons.org; www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: ACTION-434: Some notes on organizing discussion on WebApps architecture
>
>    Larry wrote:
>
> "Well, I wonder if we might introduce another step between
> "resource" and "representation" which is "application resource
> in identified state", so that the representation isn't a
> representation of the resource, but a representation of the
> resource in that state."
>
> Perhaps!  But how is the state indicated?  Either the URL changes or there is some other
> information such as cookies.  We need to be explicit about this.
>
>
> All the best, Ashok
>
> On 10/14/2010 2:11 PM, Larry Masinter wrote:
>> Well, I wonder if we might introduce another step between
>> "resource" and "representation" which is "application resource
>> in identified state", so that the representation isn't a
>> representation of the resource, but a representation of the
>> resource in that state.
Received on Thursday, 14 October 2010 23:09:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:28 GMT