- From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 23:28:55 -0600
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On 2002-02-18 4:38 PM, "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> wrote: > I would also observe that all the web browsers I use seem to be able > to handle fragIds without any problems. That's because they perform a retrieval action. I suppose RDF users can grab files and talk about their hashes, but using them as generic resources causes problems, even on the web. Perhaps some background would be good, I suggest reading Roy Fielding's description of the REST model as applied to URIs: http://www1.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/evaluation.htm#sec_6_2 And REST Architectural elements: http://www1.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch_style.htm#sec_ 5_2 And as Roy explains: """ At no time whatsoever is the resource transferred across the network when doing a GET. Only a REPRESENTATION of that resource is transferred, and the fragment refers to a target within the representation and not within the resource. That is why fragments are media-type specific. """ - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2001May/0019 Are URI-references bound to resources? Roy Fielding, May 11 2001 I hope this makes sense. -- "Aaron Swartz" | Swhack Weblog <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> | <http://blogspace.com/swhack/weblog/> <http://www.aaronsw.com/> | something different every day
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2002 00:28:51 UTC