Jeni Tennison wrote: > Nathan, > > On 29 Mar 2012, at 12:48, Nathan wrote: >> You can think of the term "Resource" as being namespaced within each specification, RFC3986-Resource is not equivalent to HTTPbis-Resource. Indeed it's this ambiguity in terminology which creates most of the mess around httpRange-14. > > Could you please point me to the part of HTTPbis that defines "resource" (ie HTTPbis-Resource)? I understand that HTTPbis only talks about resources that are identified through HTTP URIs, but I can't find the part of the specification that defines "resource" such that I (a Person) am not an HTTPbis resource. I'll defer you to Roy and Tim (both cc'd) on that one ;) However, regardless of the reply to the above, as outlined previously [1] I believe that your change proposal [2] is still a change proposal which affects HTTPbis rather than httpRange-14. Perhaps somebody who knows the area better than I can confirm. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2012Mar/0179.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2012Mar/0086.html Best, NathanReceived on Thursday, 29 March 2012 13:03:59 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:50 GMT