- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 13:33:14 -0500
- To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
On Nov 30, 2005, at 2:05 PM, Larry Masinter wrote: > Well, let's try to get down to the issue rather than talk about > the wording. > > I disagree, fairly profoundly, with "4.3.1 R7. Try any protocol > for any resource", as stated. I don't find it appealing either. > That's a Humpty-Dumpty rule, as if > you were saying "In English, any word can mean whatever you want > it to mean". > > I think the meaning of any URI that starts with "http://host/path" must > be "use the HTTP protocol to connect to 'host' and send it 'path'", > because that's the definition of the "http" URI scheme. I think that's a little too strong. Here's a rule that I think I subscribe to: If you can access a resource via HTTP, then it has a name that starts with http: and If it has a name that starts with http://..., then you may use HTTP to access it. but not If it has a name that starts with http://..., then you must use HTTP to access it. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Sunday, 4 December 2005 18:33:11 UTC