- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:02:41 +0200
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On 29 March 2012 15:44, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > On 3/29/12 9:05 AM, Danny Ayers wrote: > What about inferring, with clarity, that a resource and its representation > are *potentially* ambiguous without additional clarity provide by relations > of the kind delivered by :describedby. > > We are dealing resource representation resolution and fidelity. If you come > at the resource from a certain world view (e.g., information space) you have > a resource with fine-grained representation. For instance, and HTML > resource is structured enough for browsers to render Web Pages. Yep, that's how I read it too. As far as a browser is concerned there isn't really a distinction between "representation"/"authoritative representation" as I put it, "nominal representation"/"representation" as Jeni has put it or "HTML"/"HTML+metadata" as would be on the wire in this case. > Come at it from a different world view (e.g., data space) and you have a > blob since the content doesn't conform to the required structural fidelity > of an entity-attribute-value graph, and even worse, actual pathways to said > graph become skewed (re. follow-your-nose navigation via name->address > indirection ) if hyperlink (e.g., HTTP URI) based name and address choices > introduce ambiguity. There can still be ambiguity whatever we do, but the describedby (or 303-implied) metadata makes it possible to reduce it, no? Cheers, Danny. -- http://dannyayers.com http://webbeep.it - text to tones and back again
Received on Thursday, 29 March 2012 14:11:15 UTC