- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 17:05:41 -0500
- To: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>, Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>, "'Daniel W. Connolly'" <connolly@beach.w3.org>, "'Jim Whitehead'" <ejw@rome.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Cc: "'w3c-dist-auth@w3.org'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
At 11:32 PM 10/30/96 -0800, Yaron Goland wrote: >Of "entity" and "representation": pick one and stick with it. > >But in this case, I think you meant resource, i.e. the gizmo associated >with a URL. > >[Yaron] >No we mean representation(s), meaning one or more than one representations >of a resource. Where representation is defined as in HTTP 1.1. > >representation > An entity included with a response that is subject to content > negotiation, as described in section 12. There may exist multiple > representations associated with a particular response status. > >The key here is that we are not just talking about an entity, we are >talking about a content negotiated entity. I have removed all references to >entity and replaced them with representation. >[\Yaron] I am very unhappy with this notion. Look at it another way: as I mentioned in an earlier mail and Dan pointed out again, a representation/entity is a dead bag of bytes - a resource has life. Please refer to my ealier mail for details on the definition as pr HTTP: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/msg00285.html If you say that distributed authoring is about editing entities and not resources, the model breaks down when we step plain old outside file systems. Stuff like editing a server side include or a data base entry doesn't make sense any longer! Henrik -- Henrik Frystyk Nielsen, <frystyk@w3.org> World Wide Web Consortium, MIT/LCS NE43-356 545 Technology Square, Cambridge MA 02139, USA
Received on Thursday, 31 October 1996 17:08:09 UTC