- From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 10:31:48 -0400
- To: <ogbujic@ccf.org>
- Cc: <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
> From: Chimezie Ogbuji [mailto:ogbujic@ccf.org] > . . . > I noticed there is a simultaneous TAG thread [1] on this very topic. > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007May/0063.html Yes, that message from John Cowen is an excellent illustration of the fact that it only reliably makes sense to talk about the semantics (read: "GRDDL results") of a *representation* -- not an information resource. Indeed, two representations may have very different semantics. Such a situation would conflict with the WebArch: http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#p139 [[ representation providers must not use content negotiation to serve representation formats that have inconsistent fragment identifier semantics. This situation also leads to URI collision ]] However, it could indeed occur, and it is important to be able to clearly say: "The semantics of representations A and B are correct, but the semantics of representation C are wrong". David Booth, Ph.D. HP Software +1 617 629 8881 office | dbooth@hp.com http://www.hp.com/go/software
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2007 14:32:29 UTC