- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 22:45:55 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>, "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>
> Why not, "can emit a response to some kind of access protocol" ? That seems > to handle all the present and all the likely future cases, be unambiguous, > and (by philosophical standards) vividly clear and unambiguous. And it has > the great merit of talking about the **actual resource** rather than an > awww:representation of it, which (latter) is what gets conveyed in messages, > in fact. What does "can emit a response to some kind of access protocol" the answer to? Notably, it doesn't include things like text files with html in them. -Alan
Received on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 21:46:46 UTC