W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2012

Re: Naming things with hashes (not #, but e.g. md5)

From: Jonathan A Rees <rees@mumble.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 17:51:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGnGFM+ENjNHANfEwk2Ujm80N+zXv=SNmruWkEjsZj0+ygKs_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote:
> httpRange-14 is about trying to give a meaning to URIs other than the meaning that derives naturally from the interpretation of the URI in an a@href. Thus, I think httpRange-14 is based on a presumption that is false.

Just to be clear, the hr14 resolution has two parts, a 2xx case (a)
and a 303 case (b). I assume you are talking about the 303 case,
because the 200 case is designed to make the interpretation in href=
be the same as the interpretation in RDF. If there is a mismatch in
the 2xx case we should fix that.

Right? Or do I misunderstand you?

The 303 case is out of the TAG's hands as it is enshrined in HTTPbis.
So if I understand you correctly this comment would be better directed
to the HTTP WG.

I am struggling to understand 'If you ask what a name "means", you're
asking about what of its mapping to meaning you want to persist.'  If
I ask what an occurrence (in some context) of a name "means", I'm
asking what the party who wrote that occurrence intended when they
wrote it. Do you mean that the meaning they intended has to persist
(in some way) until the point in time when I try to understand what
they wrote, so that I can understand them? I think I would agree with
that. This certainly applies to a@href, where they intend for me to
get to content they would be happy for me to get to in that situation.
If the wrong content is served that's certainly not what they intend.
This idea applies in a similar way to any URI written in RDF. Anyone
trying to understand old RDF has to be prepared to use the wayback
machine to understand URIs, just as anyone trying to understand old
HTML has to be prepared to use it too.

Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2012 21:52:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:44 UTC