W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2006

RE: Generic-Resources-53: URIs for representations

From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 14:40:39 -0400
Message-ID: <EBBD956B8A9002479B0C9CE9FE14A6C201472D29@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>
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:

	custom view

> > [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
Phone: +1 617 629 8881
Received on Wednesday, 4 October 2006 18:40:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:13 UTC