- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:51:31 -0400
- To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
- Cc: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>, www-tag@w3.org
On 2008-05 -29, at 16:33, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote: > >> The media type returned by .../blink-01.zip > > Doesn't reliance on media-type suggest a # as opposed to / as > separator, > as in: > > http://example.com/sample.zip#outer/inner/deepest > > My quick reading of RFC 3986 suggests that this syntax is legal in a > fragid. Of course, it has the characteristic that only the > identifier of > the zip container is typically sent "on the wire". I don't see how > the > media type spec can help you crack: > > http://example.com/sample.zip/outer/inner/deepest > > As Stuart says, that URI is opaque, and a client would not in > general have > knowledge of the relationship of those last 3 components to zip > packaging, > I think. No, so the server would *either* unpack the item and return it, (200) *or* return metadata explaining what is going on, so that the client can retrieve the zip file (303) *or* return metadata explaining what is going on, with the zip file (TBD) Tim
Received on Thursday, 29 May 2008 20:52:13 UTC