- From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 14:40:39 -0400
- To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>, <raman@google.com>, "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] > > On Oct 2, 2006, at 7:31 AM, Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) wrote: > > I think that in creating webarch [2] we tried to maintain a fairly > > clear distinction between resources and representations (modulo > > anything can be a resource!). In that world view, IIRC, it > > was "resources" rather than "representations" that have URIs. > > Er... you just noted yourself that anything can be a resource. > > As such, I think it's not too harmful to speak of URIs for > representations. I rather strongly disagree. For one thing, it is apt to lead to unnecessary confusion. For another thing, once one of those representations has a URI and it responds to http requests, we'd be in the rather uncomfortable position of having to refer to what it returns as "the representation of the representation" -- not a direction I think we want to go. Please find some other term to use. I'll just through out a few more ideas to stimulate thinking: snapshot view custom view presentation > > > [1] > http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/alternatives-discovery-20060915.html > > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch David Booth, Ph.D. HP Software dbooth@hp.com Phone: +1 617 629 8881
Received on Wednesday, 4 October 2006 18:40:52 UTC