Re: Base URLs

Roy T. Fielding (fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU)
Fri, 10 Feb 1995 20:10:19 -0800


To: David Robinson <drtr1@cam.ac.uk>
Cc: uri@bunyip.com
Subject: Re: Base URLs 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 10 Feb 1995 12:19:00 GMT."
             <m0rcuJU-0007akC@grus.cus.cam.ac.uk> 
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 20:10:19 -0800
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>
Message-Id:  <9502102010.aa18409@paris.ics.uci.edu>

>> > Why distinguish message
>> > headers from other retrieval contexts?
>>
>>It does not.  Message headers ARE the retrieval context -- the document
>>is encapsulated inside the message.
> 
> But it does! You talk about retrieval context in section 3.3, but a base URL
> within message headers is mentioned in section 3.2.  The implication, for a
> casual reader, is that message headers are not retrieval context. This is also
> shown graphically, with a box between the two. Hence, as Owen Rees assumed, the
> relative priority of message headers and document content was chosen
> arbitrarily.
> 
> I was trying to suggest that the base URL in message headers should be
> explained as simply another example of retrieval context.

Ah, you are quite right -- I had come to that conclusion in writing the
description of composite media types, but the concept did not get fully
represented in the spec.  I will try to find a way to reword section 3
such that "retrieval context" is used consistantly.


......Roy Fielding   ICS Grad Student, University of California, Irvine  USA
                                     <fielding@ics.uci.edu>
                     <URL:http://www.ics.uci.edu/dir/grad/Software/fielding>