- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 15:51:59 +0200
- To: wangxiao@musc.edu
- CC: Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
Xiaoshu Wang wrote: > In that case, I have explained that there is NO need for LINK whatsoever > (by the principle of orthogonal specification). What is the point if > you can describe those relation in "content" but you insist to put it in > another place. This rational, in fact, breaks the "uniformness" that For once, it will work for all kinds of contents (independently of the media type), and furthermore it will work always the same way. > ... > HTTP is about deliver *message*. All HTTP-header's role should serve > one function - that is how to get message and how to transform the > *message* in *content*. > ... Well, maybe it should, but that isn't what HTTP in fact does. HTTP has had both request/response headers *and* entity headers for ages. BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 11 April 2008 13:59:25 UTC