W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2007

Re: Subgroup to handle semantics of HTTP etc?

From: Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:31:43 +0100
Message-ID: <471DF7BF.3080908@musc.edu>
To: "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>
CC: "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>, W3C-TAG Group WG <www-tag@w3.org>, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Jonathan A Rees <jar@mumble.net>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>

Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) wrote:
>> From: Xiaoshu Wang [mailto:wangxiao@musc.edu]
>>     
> < [ . . . ]
>   
>> Is there any distinguishable difference between a "document
>> (awww:InformationResource)" and a person?
>>
>> Current, AWWW thinks so (from my understanding).  I think not, which I
>> just responded to Noah's question.
>> [ . . . ]
>>     
>
> There *is* an architectural difference between things that can emit HTTP 200 response codes and things that cannot, because the WebArch has more to say about those things that emit 200 response codes.  The WebArch does not have more to say about people.  That is why the definition of "information resource" should be corrected to be clear that an "information resource" is a thingy that can emit HTTP 200 response codes with bit strings that the WebArch calls "representations".[1]
>   
What is the difference? And how much *more* if any?  This kind of vague 
and blank statement is the source of problem.

Sure, we can define "information resource" = those resource whose URI 
responds 200 when dereferenced with HTTP.  But with this definition, the 
"information resource" is defined with the context of HTTP protocol.  
Its meaning is about the behavior of an HTTP server in response to the 
URI request.  It may be useful when discussing the HTTP protocol, but it 
says nothing about the resource it denotes.

Xiaoshu
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2007 13:32:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:18 UTC