- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:17:45 +0000
- To: public-html@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8264 Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |NE --- Comment #1 from Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org> 2009-11-12 05:17:44 --- quoting Larry Masinter: > To understand the web, a reader will need to be familiar with other documents > which establish terminology that this specification disagrees with. The > documents describing URIs and HTTP are not just "authoritative documents", > they're the actual documents that are also necessary to read and understand how > the web works. Defining and using different and inconsistent terminology is > very confusing, and leads to the specification being unclear about essential > processes. The result is also at odds with reality (since some resources have > no representation and content-negotiated resources may have many). > > RFC 3986 section 1.2.2 gives an overview of the relationship between > "resource" and "representation" as well as "retrieval". > > When URIs are used within information retrieval systems to identify > sources of information, the most common form of URI dereference is > "retrieval": making use of a URI in order to retrieve a > representation of its associated resource. A "representation" is a > sequence of octets, along with representation metadata describing > those octets, that constitutes a record of the state of the resource > at the time when the representation is generated. Retrieval is > achieved by a process that might include using the URI as a cache key > to check for a locally cached representation, resolution of the URI > to determine an appropriate access mechanism (if any), and > dereference of the URI for the sake of applying a retrieval > operation. Depending on the protocols used to perform the retrieval, > additional information might be supplied about the resource (resource > metadata) and its relation to other resources. > > This terminology is used and expanded in > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging. > > > CHANGE PROPOSAL: > > The editorial changes are, unfortunately, extensive, and will require looking > at every use of "resource" and "file", as well as "fetch" and "fetching". > > To start with section 2.1, "resources", change this to reference RFC 3986 and > define "resources, representations, and retrieval". > > Align the definitions with the HTTP specification. > > (there are other definitions which also need alignment, including MIME type, > content type; do those need separate bug reports?) > [no comment; just repeating description in order to get it echoed to public-html] -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 12 November 2009 05:17:54 UTC