W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2003

[metadataInURI-31] RE: Second Draft of summary of TAG issue abstr actComponentRefs-37

From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 11:42:04 +0100
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F04A074DE@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
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>


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

[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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:58 UTC