W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2008

Re: Private naming conventions and hypermedia (was Re: Draft minutes from TAG telcon of 2008-07-24

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 02:33:45 -0400
Message-ID: <e9dffd640807252333t15411c89r5df189b016be0157@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Paul Prescod" <paul@prescod.net>
Cc: "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>, "David Orchard" <orchard@pacificspirit.com>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>

On 7/26/08, Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  > A hypermedia approach would have explicitly declared the "?" URI in
>  > the former representation with some link metadata called
>  > "metadata-record" or some such, e.g. <a rel="metadata" href="?" />
> think the thing being neglected in this discussion is that the reason
>  for the naming convention is that HTTP based resolution may not be
>  always appropriate for these identifiers. You can't do an HTTP request
>  to determine that another resolution mechanism would have been more
>  reliable or efficient.
> I think that you guys are talking about solving a different problem
>  than the XRI team is trying to solve. It isn't about interpreting the
>  representation for purposes of processing the resource. It's about
>  interpreting the identifier itself, for purposes of eventual
>  dereferencing.

In this thread we're just talking about hypermedia in the context of
Henry's question about out of band agreement on the meaning of names.
That seems a couple levels detached from the more general
XRI-and-the-Web issue.

>  Can you offer a suggestion that meets the requirements of the
> applicant and also preserves the benefits of an HTTP URI?

Which requirements?

(and may I suggest a new thread, or reusing an existing one?)

Received on Saturday, 26 July 2008 06:34:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:23 UTC