- From: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2016 16:22:58 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
> @azaroth42 <https://github.com/azaroth42> > Thanks for the resources. > I include here the recommended good practices from the W3C webpage: > > Good Practice > > _Authorities MAY create HTTP URIs for non-information resources in addition to those for information resources. > > If a URI identifies an information resource, the URI owner SHOULD provide representations of that resource. This is based on the available representation practice 3.5 in [AWWW] > > If a URI identifies a non-information resource, the URI owner SHOULD provide an associated information resource which, when dereferenced, provides additional information about the original resource. In addition, the URI owner SHOULD make the URI of an associated information resource available using the mechanism based on returning an HTTP response code of 303 to the original request._ > > By reading this text, I understand that the recommendation is that also "non-information resources" SHOULD be dereferencable, > > even if they are not "directly" dereferencable using their URIs. I don't find an inconsistency with my change request. > That is not the way I read it. Authorities MAY create a HTTP URI; *if* they do, then there should be an additional mechanism. But the operative term is 'MAY'. The practice of all this may also be very complicated. Just as an example (it is only an analogy, does not apply directly to this case, but shows the complexities involved) you may have fun reading this document: https://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-vocab-pub/ (The HTTPRange-14 discussion that Rob referred to is also similar.) This whole issue of HTTPRange-14 has been on the SW agenda for long, and the fact of the matter is that application developers often ignored all this. Using a MAY in our text is a pragmatic acknowledgement of the difficulties involved in imposing an ideal practice. My vote is to leave things as they are. -- GitHub Notification of comment by iherman Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/372#issuecomment-257917121 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 2 November 2016 16:23:04 UTC