- From: Gregory J. Woodhouse <gjw@wnetc.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 17:05:31 -0800 (PST)
- To: Steve Carter <SRCarter@GW.NOVELL.COM>
- cc: masinter@parc.xerox.com, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
This is interesting. Byte ranges are indpendently cacheable, as are multiple representations of the same resource, but unless I'm misunderstanding something fundamental, they don't have URIs. It seems here that the difficulty comes from the assumption that a lockable resource must be uniquely identified through a URI. --- gjw@wnetc.com / http://www.wnetc.com/home.html If you're going to reinvent the wheel, at least try to come up with a better one.
Received on Tuesday, 25 February 1997 20:12:37 UTC