W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: Clarification on use of Content-Location header

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 14:34:32 -0700
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <BE8B13F6-D1F4-4D7F-A086-347745747534@gbiv.com>
To: Henrik Nordström <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
On May 14, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Henrik Nordström wrote:

> fre 2010-05-14 klockan 12:36 -0700 skrev Roy T. Fielding:
>> All schemes are dereferenceable, including urn, info, and tag.
> Are they?

Yes.  Any scheme can be proxied through HTTP, even when it
might be unwise to do so.

> Quote from the tag scheme specification RFC4151:
>        There is no authoritative resolution mechanism for tags.  Unlike
>        most other URIs, tags can only be used as identifiers, and are
>        not designed to support resolution.  If authoritative resolution
>        is a desired feature, a different URI scheme should be used.
> Some of the  URN name spaces have similar issues.

That doesn't prevent anyone from introducing a resolution, deploying
it, and then configuring their web tools to dereference it.

There is a long history of URN-like specifications living in some
fantasy land that has no correspondence with Web technology.

Received on Friday, 14 May 2010 21:35:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:53 UTC