[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
As I see it, we have these camps (leaving aside the possibly-important
issue of fragids in URIrefs):
1) If you do an HTTP GET on an http: URI, not only may you get nothing
because something is broken, but you may get nothing because the authority
creating the URI purposely does not make anything available. The URI is
just a string that may identify anything, document/not, concrete/abstract.
The authority creating the URI decides what that thing is.
2) If you do an HTTP GET on an http: URI, you should expect to get something
back (though you may not because something is broken). What the URI
identifies is exactly the thing you get back, or a slight abstraction of
that to account for conneg and modification over time.
3) If you do an HTTP GET on an http: URI, you should expect to get something
back (though you may not because something is broken). The thing you get
back is just a representation of the actual thing that the URI identifies;
what that actual thing is is decided by the authority creating the URI.
--
Kian-Tat Lim, ktl@ktlim.com, UTF-7: +Z5de+pBU-
|
