W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > November 2002

Re: RFC 2396 revision issue: Query definition

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 11:34:15 -0800
Message-ID: <0c2f01c28b4b$a86e1570$f4457743@mnotlaptop>
To: "Hrvoje Simic" <hrvoje.simic@zg.hinet.hr>, <uri@w3.org>

It would be nice if this could be addressed in some fashion. Thanks for
bringing it up, and summarizing the history so nicely (I wasn't aware of
the previous discussion).

> My ideas on redefinition: query should be "identifying the resource
> within the scope of that scheme and authority" just as the path is. The
> difference between the components may be in ordering: while the path
> segments must be in strict order (defining the path through a
> hierarchy), query segments may be in arbitrary order, like "parameters"
> or "switches". Information in query segments may also be optional and
> generally more detailed than the path segments [1].

Those feel like guidelines more than hard semantics; IIRC, the main
distinction between URI path segments and URI parameters is that
parameters aren't ordered, so that aspect doesn't distinguish queries.

Perhaps what does distinguish queries is that while they are used in
identifying the resource, they aren't used directly in
locating/dereferencing it; just as fragment identifier semantics are
interpreted on the client side in the scope of the resource's
representation, so queries are interpreted on the server side in the scope
of the located resource (which may be a new concept).

I haven't worked through the ramifications of this; just food for thought.
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2002 14:34:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:05 UTC