Re: [pedantic-web] Re: The OWL Ontology URI

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote:
> Well, according to http-range-14, as I understand it, if a bare URI gives a
> 200-level response to an HTTP GET, then it (the URI) denotes/refers to the
> resource that emits that response.

I agreed with you for a while when you first wrote about this theory,
since it's an elegant theory, but now I think it makes more sense to
say that the *server* emits the response, not the document. Not only
is this more consistent with the way RFC 2616 and AWWW are written,
but it lets you have a URI U that refers to a document, where a server
responds with a 200 for GET U. This seems natural and desirable. But
for any sensible definition of "document", <U> is going to be
incapable of emitting a response. That's why it has a server to help
it out...  in your formulation a 200 response would be prohibited
since <U> can't emit it.

Jonathan

Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2010 13:54:59 UTC