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

[httpRange-14] levels of representation

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 13:45:26 -0400
Message-ID: <0a0301c34ee6$b761a420$b6f5d3ce@svhs.local>
To: "WWW-Tag" <www-tag@w3.org>

Perhaps some of the difficulty in resolving (sic) httpRange-14 lies in what
appears to be two different meanings of 'resource representation' for
example:

1) text/html representation -isRepresentationOf-> document-X
    application/pdf representation -isRepresentationOf-> document-X
i.e. document-format -represents-> "abstract document"

vs.
2) document-X -isRepresentationOf-> weather in Oaxaca
i.e. document -> isAbout -> resource

I am not sure it is emprically possible to decide which of the above two
types of representation are correct (i.e. I think both are correct under
specific circumstances). For example, when common (i.e. non-technical)
people click on a link in a browser and see a document "about" the weather
in Oaxaca, it seems entirely consistent to say that what is seen in the web
browser is the representation and the resource is the "weather in Oaxaca".
On the other hand when network folks (i.e. technical folks) talk about how
the HTTP protocol works it is common to discuss protocols having binding
endpoints and across which messages are exchanged. In this sense the message
is the "representation" and the endpoint is the "resource".

If the WebArch document could better clarify which of the above usages of
the term "representation" is intended that might be helpful, alternatively
state that either or both are acceptable.

Jonathan
Received on Sunday, 20 July 2003 13:45:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:00 UTC