- From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 11:42:04 +0100
- To: "'noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com'" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "'David Orchard'" <dorchard@bea.com>, www-tag@w3.org, Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Noah, I don't think that we will be able to resolve metaDataInURI-31 [1] without some consideration of the opacity priniciple. I hope that for now at least we can view metaDataInURI-31 as a reasonable 'peg' to hang opacity discussions on, rather than opening a fresh issue. Anyway, thank you for your concern and interest, and I shall endeavour to make some progress on *drafting* a finding for the issue as a seed for further discussion. Best regards Stuart -- [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#metaDataInURI-31 > -----Original Message----- > From: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com [mailto:noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com] > Sent: 28 April 2003 20:49 > To: Jonathan Borden > Cc: 'David Orchard'; Williams, Stuart; www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: Second Draft of summary of TAG issue > abstractComponentRefs-37 > > > Jonathan Borden writes: > > > URIs should be considered opaque by processes that > > assign URIs to resources. URIs should only be parsed by > > processes that retrieve representations of resources > > identified by a particular URI a.k.a. the process of > > "URI resolution" > > This seems to me to be an over simplification. How, for example, do we > explain the query component ("?") of a URI and its incremental > construction by the GET mode of HTML forms? [1]. RFC 2396 is very clear > that the query string is part of the URI, and surely that string is not > best thought of as opaque at either the client or the server according to > this common usage. To just say "URIs should be opaque to processes > assigning URIs to resources" seems to ignore not only query strings, but > also the provision of a hierarchical idiom in 2396 and its common (and > presumably intended) application to hierarchical resources such as > filesystems. > > I think the opacity principle is very important, but I think the TAG has a > real opportunity to set it forth clearly and in a form that will answer > practical questions about its application to real-world scenarios. I've > requested this of the TAG before [2], and at the risk wearing out my > welcome, Jonathan's note prompts me to repeat that suggestion. Any chance > the TAG would want to open an issue on clarifying the opacity principle? > Thank you. > > Noah > > [1] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_8.html#SEC8.2.2 > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jan/0158.html > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 > IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > >
Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2003 06:43:01 UTC