- From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Date: 12 Apr 2002 11:52:37 -0400
- To: www-archive@w3.org
- Cc: www-talk@w3.org
On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 11:30, Mark Baker wrote: > On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 08:48:51AM -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote: > > A GET is a rather direct mechanism for retrieving a representation, and > > while it works for HTTP, I'm not sure it _should_ work for every other > > flavor of URI. > > HTTP isn't necessarily "direct". I can ask any HTTP node (server or > intermediary) to resolve any URI on my behalf. This is how caches, > firewalls, gateways, and other intermediaries work. The practice is not necessarily direct, but the style is. An HTTP GET is *asking for* something. Other approaches to URI processing *ask about* something. Minor change, major ramifications, especially since many URIs offer no direct means of asking for but you can always ask about anything, even HTTP URIs. Intermediaries are interesting, but very different. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com
Received on Friday, 12 April 2002 11:47:20 UTC