fragment or sub-resources

During the last two teleconferences, we discussed a bit the issue of # vs 
? (ie: fragment vs sub-resources).
It seems that when we are not in the trivial case of just getting a part 
of the compressed resource, ie: when transcoding is needed, that a 
sub-resource might be a better match, it may have a Link: header pointing 
to the original resource, but would be a resource on its own.

Now, as you can't know in advance if the server support a specific syntax 
for getting sub-resources of a specific resource, we might want to signal 
this using a URI template [1], as in that case it really sets expectations 
for the client (note that it is an example on how to advertise that a 
server would use our syntax for sub-resource).


Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.


Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 09:13:38 UTC