- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 12:22:33 -0500
- To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFA3985EF7.DA6DE46D-ON85257220.005F0BFA-85257220.005F76D7@lotus.com>
Mostly these are great. A couple of suggested corrections to the logging of what I said: > The interesting question is, does the code that goes with that library have an interpretive model, or is it interpreting something more declarative. I think that should be: "The interesting question is, does the code that goes with that library have an imperative programming model, or is it interpreting something more declarative. " ---------- Also, near the end: > But then the question is about what the contract is between the > client and the server. > ... I don't think that you're giving the client permission to > construct parts of the URI that come before the sharp sign. > ... It's not clear to me that client side construction of URIs is limited. Should be: But then the question is about what the contract is between the client and the server. ... The client is typically responsible for interpreting any fragment ids supplied to ... it, but that doesn't say much about constructing new ones. ... I don't think there's in all cases a prohibition against the client "constructing" ... URIs by altering things after the ? or even in the path segments before. ... These manipulations are legal insofar as the authority for the URI has documented ... the URI assignment policy. Given that, in many cases, the Javascript doing ... that manipulation is sourced from that authority, I think it's often acceptable. ... So, it's not clear to me that client side construction of URIs is limited ... to minting new fragids. Thanks. With those changes, the minutes look fine to me. -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 --------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 8 November 2006 17:28:54 UTC