- From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 18:13:08 +0000
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- CC: "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>, "wangxiao@musc.edu" <wangxiao@musc.edu>, 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>
> -----Original Message----- > From: Pat Hayes [mailto:phayes@ihmc.us] > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 12:30 PM > To: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) > Cc: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol); wangxiao@musc.edu; > W3C-TAG Group WG; Alan Ruttenberg; Jonathan A Rees; Dan > Connolly; Tim Berners-Lee > Subject: RE: Resources and representations (was RE: Subgroup > to handle semantics of HTTP etc?) > > > > From: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) > >> [ . . . ] > >> The HTTP range question simply asks what sort of things can > >> an HTTP URI refer to? > >> And the answer given is 'any kind of thing' (whether or not > >> their is a '#' in the spelling of the URI). > > > >True, but to be clear, the WebArch also imposes some additional > >constraints that depend on: (a) what kind of resource is denoted; > >and (b) the media type returned when the URI is dereferenced. In > >particular: > > > > - If the URI denotes a non-information resource and the URI has a > >fragment identifier and a 200 response is returned when the racine > >(the part before the '#') of the URI is dereferenced, then the media > >type returned must be a media type that permits its fragment > >identifiers to denote arbitrary resources. For example, you may > >return RDF but *not* (currently) HTML, because the media type for > >RDF permits a fragment identifier to denote anything, whereas in > >HTML a fragment identifier denotes a location within the document. > > Does the HTML spec mention denotation? Yes, but not using that word. :) The HTML 4.01 spec uses the term "refer to": http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/intro.html#h-2.1.2 and the text/html media type spec RFC 2854 uses the term "designates": http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2854.txt and URI spec RFC 3986 uses the term "identfied": http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt In these contexts I think all of these terms are intended to refer to the same concept, which is the idea that a URI is associated with a resource: I currently prefer the term "denote"
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2007 18:19:29 UTC