- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 13:58:09 -0500
- To: "ext Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>
- Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>, <raman@google.com>, "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>
If one considers the representation as the atomic unit of the web, then one can say that a representation is a discrete stream of bytes and a representation of a represenation is always bit-equal to itself. If one has a URI which the URI owner asserts denotes a representation, then that's what it denotes, and dereferencing it should result in getting back that discrete sequence of bytes that is the representation in question. A URI which supposedly denotes a representation would always return the exact same sequence of bytes every time it is dereferenced. So no problem with a representation being denoted by a URI, and one need not worry about having "turtles all the way down". C.f. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2004Oct/ 0076.html for more thoughts on this. Cheers, Patrick On Oct 4, 2006, at 13:40, ext Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) wrote: > >> 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 18:59:03 UTC