Lists Home |
Date Index |
On 2002-02-14 18:28, "ext Jonathan Borden" <email@example.com> wrote:
<snip>Lots of stuff about what the SW is, which we really agree about
and aren't central to the discussion, so...</snip>
> I will respond to this statement from Patrick Stickler's prior email:
> The problem here is that if I dereference some URI expecting to
> access that actual resource, and get some metadata or RDDL document
> or something else in its place, how do I necessarily know that
> that is *not* in fact the resource? It may not actually be apparent
> from the mnemmonic qualities of the URI, and such qualities are
> unlikely to be meaningful to some software application.
> Let me try to say this as clearly as possible:
> When you dereference a URI you NEVER get back the _resource_. Never ever.
That may be true for 'http:' URI denoted resources, but not for
all URI denoted resources.
> You get back a representation of the resource. Certainly in the special case
> of the "data:" scheme, the representation and the resource are essentially
> defined to be one and the same,
My point exactly.
> but in the case of the "http" scheme for
> example, this is not the case.
Ahh. Then we agree.
> The RDDL document which describes a namespace IS NOT EVER the namespace.
Then it shouldn't be returned. If it's not the resource, it's not the
resource, and for GET to return something that is not the resource is IMO a
> The real question is: until Patrick's all knowing global metadata registry
> gets implemented and working,
I've addressed this in my reply to Eric. Feel free to continue with
your interim solutions, just don't presume that it is the optimal
long term solution for these problems.
Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center Email: firstname.lastname@example.org