Re: [widgets] Widgets URI scheme

Thanks Norm.  All I meant was that, for media types like HTML, the normal 
pattern is that the entire representation of the resource identified by 
the left hand side (ahead of the #) is sent to the client, and resolution 
of the fragment is done there.  I suppose that, for some other media type, 
it should be possible to allow the client to use a more elaborate means of 
resolving a fragment, perhaps by retrieving just a particular byte range 
of e.g. the zip file, using HTTP 1.1.  Still, relying on the media type 
seems to at least suggest a scenario in which the entire zip would often 
wind up being sent to the client.  I'd expect that would sometimes be 
appropriate, but sometimes it might be a performance problem.

Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

Norman Walsh <>
Sent by:
05/30/2008 02:02 PM
        cc:     (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM)
        Subject:        Re: [widgets] Widgets URI scheme

/ was heard to say:
| What I'm puzzled about is that Norm had specifically proposed reliance 
| the media type that would result from a retrieval of:
| and I don't see how that enters into the case where the server does the 
| unpacking and returns a 200 for the "deepest" item.

I don't think it addresses the case where the server does the
unpacking. I had imagined that the media type for might say
"look, this is a package, here's how you can find out the parts inside
it and here's how you can address them." Maybe the media type doesn't
have that much latitude, though, I'd have to go back and check to be

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman Walsh <> | One should always be a little            | improbable.--Oscar Wilde

Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2008 21:43:52 UTC