- From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 17:36:42 -0800
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>, "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
> > Unfortunately, your model doesn't work for me, in trying to to > > effectively use URIs in knowledge representation languages (like RDF). > > Why? Every statement to that effect has so far been disproven, not Really? > that breaks in the REST model? First, I thought we have established long ago that such things are insignificant to REST. REST only needs to be able to identify representation dispensers, and *sometimes* a particular representation (etag). That is just fine for HTTP, but HTTP has practically nothing to do with KR, and such laissez-faire identification is not suitable for KR. > for the metadata that is included in HTTP responses so that the > client has an interoperable clue as to what you are talking about. What does that have to do with KR or RDF? > semantics of a Web to GSM SMS gateway using POST. I already did that > stuff seven years ago, so I expect a little more than talk at this And you did a great job. But I wonder what that has to do with KR?
Received on Tuesday, 14 January 2003 20:36:49 UTC