[Fwd: Re: What if an URI also is a URL]


With a SW Interest Group chair's hat on .... "help!"

This perma-thread (the question of URIs for people, HTTP content 
negotiation, meaning of #blah IDs etc) has been rumbling along for 
years. It is getting really embarrassing that this stuff keeps coming 
up. Can we do something here? A Faq or TAG finding or wiki page or ... 
... something, anything, to help the mailing lists move along to more 
fruitful topics of discussion?

Apologies for the x-post, this problem is split a little across groups.



Forwarded message 1

  • From: Jon Hanna <jon@hackcraft.net>
  • Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 16:20:49 +0100
  • Subject: Re: What if an URI also is a URL
  • To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
  • Cc: "Lynn, James (Software Escalations)" <james.lynn@hp.com>, "r.j.koppes" <rikkert@rikkertkoppes.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
  • Message-ID: <4666D0D1.9030005@hackcraft.net>
  • X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/4666D0D1.9030005@hackcraft.net
Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
> This is the web architecture.   The client strips off the '#me'  and 
> acceses the dcoument
> <http://www.example.com/mophor> (if it hasn't already for some other id 
> in the same document).
> The server sends back a document telling it about 
> <http://www.example.com/mophor#me> and maybe other things.

When a client is looking at what it received from 
http://www.example.com/mophor it doesn't know that's the only possible 
view upon http://www.example.com/mophor (indeed it might know the 
opposite if there is a Vary header)

When the client is interpretting #me in a way that is based on the 
content-type of what it received from http://www.example.com/mophor it 
is more tightly concerned with a particular document.

Since the mechanism for a fragment identifier is based on the document 
type, which seems if anything even more tied to documents than 

Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2007 15:53:12 UTC