- From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@rbii.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 08:58:21 -0500
- To: www-tag@w3.org
On Friday 10 January 2003 04:15 am, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > In our systems, we use URNs that do not specify encodings, > language, coverage, revision, etc. and dynamically resolve > such information at run time based on system and user properties > in order to resolve a link to an actual resource. The "user properties" is fairly significant here. In most situations where I have seen a need for something like content negotiation, content negotiation itself has been insufficient. > (If someone *wants* to specify the precise encoding, language, > revision, etc. they can, but it makes the link fragile) Right, but that's a tradeoff that the author should have the ability to make.... and for some things, only the author *can* make reliably. > Putting the "required" MIME type in the link is simply making > the links that much more fragile and defeating the purpose > of content negotiation. Precisely. In the cases where content negotiation is *not* desired, and a *specific* set of representations *must* be returned, this is a good thing.
Received on Friday, 10 January 2003 08:59:26 UTC