W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > November 2014

Re: fragment stripping before URI dereferencing

From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2014 17:32:57 +0000
Message-ID: <545FA549.8040701@ninebynine.org>
To: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>, "Rushforth, Peter" <Peter.Rushforth@NRCan-RNCan.gc.ca>
CC: "uri@w3.org" <uri@w3.org>

On 07/11/2014 01:15, John Cowan wrote:
>> Can someone explain that to me, please?  I think the 'secondary
>> resource' identified by fragment identifiers could be extremely useful
>> not only on the client but also to the origin server
> That ship sailed decades ago.  HTTP servers don't expect to see fragment
> IDs in requests and will malfunction if they get them, and non-HTTP
> servers don't have any protocol for accepting them at all.  The exchange
> between clients and servers is in terms of entity-bodies representing
> whole resources.  Nothing else is practical at this stage.
> (HTTP 1.1 clients and servers can pass around pieces of entity bodies
> using the Range and Content-Range headers, but that's low-level and
> meant for fragmentation, not for semantic fragments.)

Agreed, but...

There's still an option to use HTTP Link: headers to provide additional URI 
information, such as fragments.  Whether that's a good idea is debatable, and 
almost certainly  use-case dependent.

Received on Sunday, 9 November 2014 17:33:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:17 UTC