- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 20:54:25 +0900
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: "T.V Raman" <raman@google.com>, seb@serialseb.com, www-tag@w3.org, kidehen@openlinksw.com, tthibodeau@openlinksw.com
Le 1 août 2008 à 01:43, Richard Cyganiak a écrit : > > /resource (generic information resource with HTML and JSON > variants) > /resource.html (a HTML specific URI) > /resource.json (a JSON specific URI) Let me create another example. 1. /resource 2. /resource.html (sent as text/html) 3. /resource.html (sent as text/plain) to view the source code 4. /resource.txt (sent as text/plain) contain the text version (not the source code) And I request with: Accept text/plain The case 3. is interesting when you want to show the html source code a file without having to copy the html file twice and do resource.html and resource.html.txt In the thread it has been suggested to send what was available, the issue is which one resource.html (text/plain) or resource.txt. I'm not sure there is an easy choice. For the json/html case it seems easier to answer. -- Karl Dubost - W3C http://www.w3.org/QA/ Be Strict To Be Cool
Received on Friday, 1 August 2008 17:42:31 UTC