Michael Mealling wrote, > I think what you're missing with that statement is that different > aspects of the architecture occur at different 'layers'. Oh, no argument here. [snip: DNS example] Or here. > The 'actually-existing web' is very much a collection of abstract > nodes and processes _at that layer_. Its when that layer gets used > inside processes and system that humans use is when the issues of > semantics come into play. Don't try and flatten the layers into each > other. Layering is _useful_. But it's pretty clear that the TAGs purview and the ambitions of the various official and unoffical architecture documents go well beyond that layer. Otherwise why would we need _anything_ other than RFC 2396, 2616 et al? Cheers, MilesReceived on Friday, 20 September 2002 12:15:10 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:54 UTC