- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 03:39:31 -0500
- To: public-webarch-comments@w3.org, uri@w3.org
This is a Last Call comment to the Web Architecture Document. Because it potentiall affects RFC2396bis, I'm also copying the uri mailing list. The comment is mainly about Section 3.3, entitled "Internet Media Type" (as most of the section is about fragids, it may be better to change the title, or move most of that material to 2.6). This comment is about streamlining terminology. For URIs, a clear distinction is made between Resource and Representation. But when it comes to fragid, this distinction is suddenly gone, without any explanations. After reading the Web Arch doc, which helped me think through these issues, I got to the following table: Identifier Abstract who defines Concrete mapping URI Resource scheme: Representation(s) of Resource URI#fragment Subresource mime/type Representation(s) of Subresource In words: An URI identifies a Resource. To get a representation of the resource, you start with the scheme:, which tells you how you (potentially) get a representation. An URI#fragment identifies a Subresource. To get a representation of the subresource from a representation of the resource, you start with the mime/type of the representation of the resource, which tells you how you (potentially) get a representation of the subresource. This would allow to bring more consistency (sic!) to the Good Practice points. Currently we have: Fragment identifier consistency: to resource owners, keeping URIs with fragids consistent across content negotiation) (there is no such point for URIs, although this of course applies very much so to URIs, too) URI ambiguity: This seems to correspond to the above, or subsume it, but the terminology used is quite different Consistent URI usage: this is about not changing a URI The language for the definition of fragid semantics could then also be modified. Currently, there are things like "The Internet Media Type of the retrieved representation specifies the authoritative interpretation of the fragment identifier.". Why not just say something like "The Internet Media Type specifies how to obtain the Representation of the Subresource from the Representation of the Resource." Regards, Martin.
Received on Monday, 1 March 2004 03:40:05 UTC