- From: Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 17:13:22 -0400
- To: public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
The IETF draft [1] seems to attempt to disambiguate (at last!) http URI resolution and dereferencing from the http protocol by being explicit [2] about how dereferencing must work. What I do not read there is that the draft asserts that an http URI MUST be dereferencable. It's my understanding that nothing presently accepted by IETF, nor anything in this draft, requires that an http URI must be dereferencable. In our project we frequently generate nondereferencable http URIs whose uniqueness is guaranteed by part of it being a UUID (not a UUID urn). If I am wrong, I'd like to know why. By this I mean "Where in a specification document do I find the text that contradicts me?" If I'm right, I would hope to see the OA section on SpecificResources have the sentence "If the Specific Resource has an HTTP URI, then the exact segment of the Source resource that it identifies ..." be changed to "If the Specific Resource has a dereferencable HTTP URI, then the exact segment .... " [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-26 [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-26#section-2.7 Thanks Bob -- Robert A. Morris Emeritus Professor of Computer Science UMASS-Boston 100 Morrissey Blvd Boston, MA 02125-3390 Filtered Push Project Harvard University Herbaria Harvard University email: morris.bob@gmail.com web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/ web: http://wiki.filteredpush.org http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram === The content of this communication is made entirely on my own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or Harvard University.
Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2014 21:13:50 UTC