- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 15:41:20 -0500
- To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Cc: www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>
On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 19:55 +0100, Henry S. Thompson wrote: [...] > But I've struggled a bit to come up with good examples of real http: > URIs without fragment identifiers (all the ones above are real) which > do _not_ identify information resources. You mean you didn't read and memorize the contents of www-tag when joining the group, Henry? ;-) > So I welcome additions to this list, that is, of real http: URIs > without fragids which evidently do _not_ identify information > resources. "I claimed that http://www.markbaker.ca/ identified me, the person" -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Aug/0003.html > And an argument to back up the claim that they don't. Mark owns that domain, so he gets to say what that URI denotes. Meanwhile... I think the community also owns that URI; if the TAG's recent decision on httpRange-14 becomes the consensus of the community, then the community will conclude based on the 200 responses that seem to come back that it denotes an information resource. I think it's plain that Mark is not an information resource, so there's something of a contradiction, or at least a potential contradiction, here. While the meaning of URIs is delegated from the community to owners, the delegation is not without limits. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2005 20:41:25 UTC