[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
The querystring, despite sometimes usage, is not according to
specification for referring to different resources.
This http://www.location.org/US/MA?city=Boston
refers to US/MA
city=Boston is a property of US/MA.
On 12/9/05, Costello, Roger L. <costello@mitre.org> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> A URI is used to "identify" a resource:
>
> A Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) is a compact sequence of characters that
> identifies an abstract or physical resource.[1]
>
> I would like to bound the following discussion by considering just URLs that
> use the http scheme.
>
> As I see it, there are two main approaches to constructing a URL to identify
> a resource:
>
> Approach 1. URL Construction using Parent/Child Relationships
>
> Here's an example of a URL that uses this approach:
>
> http://www.location.org/US/MA/Boston
>
> After the [host] (www.location.org) there are a series of slash-delimited
> names. The name to the left of a slash is the parent. The name to the
> right of a slash is the child.
>
> Approach 2. URL Construction using Key-Value Pairs plus Conjunction
>
> This second approach is exemplified with this URL:
>
> http://www.location.org?country=US&state=MA&city=Boston
>
> After the [host] there is the query string delimiter (?) followed by one or
> more key=value pairs ANDed together.
>
> Hybrids of the above two approaches are also possible. For example:
>
> http://www.location.org/US/MA?city=Boston
>
> Questions
>
> (1) The above URLs (I believe) are expressing the same thing - they are
> identifying the same resource. So which is "better"?
>
> (2) As was noted at the top, the purpose of a URL is to "identify" a
> resource. Can every resource in the universe be identified using the above
> two approaches? Are there resources that do not lend themselves to
> identification using the above two approaches?
>
> /Roger
>
> [1] http://www.gbiv.com/protocols/uri/rfc/rfc3986.html
>
>
|
