- From: John Franks <john@math.nwu.edu>
- Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 09:25:19 -0500 (CDT)
- To: Jim Gettys <jg@w3.org>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
On Tue, 30 Apr 1996, Jim Gettys wrote: > Koen suggested "plain resource" rather than "specific resource". I > accepted this suggestion, as it got us out of various regarding the use > of specific elsewhere in the document, and it has the right connotation. Consider "simple resource" versus "compound resource". > > Jeff suggested "resourcelet" as a place-holder for what Roy called > "resource entity". While not happy with resource entity, I ended up > even less happy with resourcelet. So I'm going with resource entity I am bothered by the fact that a "resource entity" is not an "entity." (That is correct isn't it?) Given this I think "resourcelet" is better. John Franks Dept of Math. Northwestern University john@math.nwu.edu
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 1996 07:29:16 UTC