- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 12:53:50 -0500
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 17:31 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Tue, 6 Apr 2010, Dan Connolly wrote: > > > > This is informed by discussion with lots of people, but nobody else has > > looked at it, so it's just from me. > > > > I understand proposals were due January 16, 2010; I hope this proposal > > will get some consideration even though it's late. > > Just out of interest, is there any particular reason why the proposal > explicitly calls out the HTTP and URI specs rather than focusing on > consistency with other W3C specs? Do you mean other W3C data format specs, such as CSS? There wasn't while I was preparing it, but now that I think about it: I don't think other W3C data format specs try to define the terms "resource" and "representation". They import the terms from the URI spec. I thought about citing http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/ , but the relevant material there seems to be covered by the URI standard (RFC3986), which is already cited by HTML 5. The motivation for calling out HTTP is similar: it's a spec that HTML 5 cites. Another motivation for calling out HTTP is that the distinction between the URI/resource/representation world-view and the URL/resource world-view is tangible there; when discussing multiple HTTP transactions based on a URI, it makes sense to speak of one thing that the URI identifies across them. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 6 April 2010 17:53:52 UTC