- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 04:37:55 +0100
- To: Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
- Cc: Peter Krautzberger <peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org>, Michael Smith <mike@w3.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <ABF497A4-74E7-4963-9AF2-3EDA69555727@w3.org>
> On 21 Sep 2016, at 02:07, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com> wrote: > > Thanks Ivan, these notes are great. Thanks > > However, I'd like to nip the following on the bud right now because I > worry about where the following could go: > >> Because this is a URL, we will have to define what is returned by a server if that URL is dereferenced. > > We won't actually: if a URL uses the http/https protocol (or a URL > scheme that Fetch understands), and the request is a known HTTP method > verb, and performed in terms of fetch, then Fetch defines what should > be expected by the client: a Response, with a mime type and other > helpful HTTP headers. > > Thus, I would urge us to immediately stop using the legacy concept of > "dereference", as it's no longer part of the fetch lexicon (or part of > the Web Platform at all) - and can be extremely confusing as in > reality it has little baring on the behavior of clients that fetch > requests - and servers that serve responses. > Terminology issues, I guess… (I hope!). We still have to define what response the server would return on a URL for a WP, right (in terms of mime type, etc). If I use a URL for a HTML or an SVG page, and I issue a HTTP GET, the server would return the corresponding mime type. The same should be known for the WP case. (What I would probably expect is that the return would be something like an (extended) Web Manifest, or a (HTML) page with a reference to a manifest somewhere. But that is to be defined.) I seem to be absolutely old skool here, but what would be, in your view, the right terminology? Cheers Ivan > Kind regards, > Marcos > > > On September 20, 2016 at 5:59:15 PM, Ivan Herman (ivan@w3.org) wrote: >> >>> On 20 Sep 2016, at 08:50, Peter Krautzberger wrote: >>> >>> This link works better for me https://github.com/w3c/dpub-pwp-ucr/wiki/Jotting-down-ideas-for-the-discussions-@-TPAC-F2F-on-%3F%3F-Web-Publications >> >> I am sorry. You're right >> >> Ivan >> >>> >>> Peter. >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Ivan Herman > wrote: >>> Trying to help getting the discussion later today I tried to jot down some directions >> that we discussed yesterday. Nothing final, nothing complete of course >>> >>> Here is the URL (it is a wiki on the UCR github): >>> >>> https://github.com/w3c/dpub-pwp-ucr/wiki/Jotting-down-ideas-for-the-discussions-@-TPAC-F2F-on-%3F%3F%3F-publications >> >>> >>> Ivan >>> >>> ---- >>> Ivan Herman, W3C >>> Digital Publishing Lead >>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >>> mobile: +31-641044153 >>> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C >> Digital Publishing Lead >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> mobile: +31-641044153 >> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 >> >> >> >> >> > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
Received on Wednesday, 21 September 2016 03:38:14 UTC