- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 12:30:44 -0500
- To: "'David Orchard'" <dorchard@bea.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
I hope so. I leave the classification by methods in more knowledgeable hands. It occurs to me that if a method returns an error, say 404, the representation is not on the web. It might be on the server, but if it can't be retrieved, it isn't on the web. Does that make sense? Paring identification and retrieval methods may narrow the definition but because the results are in some context, observable/provable, that should be acceptable. It would be saying, perhaps, that identity alone is not enough to say 'something' is on the web. The queasy feeling returns. The obvious question: can a resource be on the web if a representation is not? Can that question be answered without dropping into the familiar rat hole? len From: David Orchard [mailto:dorchard@bea.com] That makes sense. I want to identify which of the web's means of identification and retrieval classify a resource as being on the web. In particular, the difference between POST and other methods. > Unless the web is understood to be a system, an architecture > makes very little sense or difference. It shouldn't be that > hard to state that a representation of a resource is 'on the web' > if the web's means of identification and retrieval can be > used and it can be observed that they successfully do retrieve > the representation. The property 'on the web' can only be proved > by testing. It can be defined in terms of the test. > > len >
Received on Friday, 11 July 2003 13:30:51 UTC