[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs

• To: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Subject: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 16:15:01 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• References: <E16al5H-0004sH-00@m...> <3C69A32B.6D1AA8C9@p...> <E16awvc-0002PK-00@c...> <001801c1b48a$61177ba0$0301a8c0@n...> <3C6AC7FF.1010809@r...> <3C6AD2F9.79A4A0D5@p...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.6) Gecko/20011120

Paul Prescod wrote:


> Agreed. The question is whether *you* can have a URI which, when someone
> does a GET on it, returns an HTML page. I don't see why not.


I have no problem with that.  My self URI doesn't do content
negotiation, so GET will return a topic map representation.

>>Again, fair enough.  But the use of "description" is an equivoque: the
>>HTML you can GET from http://www.ccil.org/~cowan/ is a representation
>>of a certain resource of type "hyperdocument". 
> 
> That is not true.


It may not be true of every such URI, but it is true of the
specific URI "http://www.ccil.org/~cowan/".


> The thing you get back is an HTML rendition of the set of all documents
> with foo and bar in them indexed by Google. If Google supports conneg, I
> can ask for an XML rendition too. The "resource" is neither of type HTML
> nor hyperdocument nor XML. It isn't even IMPLEMENTED that way. It is
> implemented as a set of probably non-contiguous bits in a Big Honking
> Database.


It's not implemented as a static file, of course.  But it is still a
document (with dynamic content, to be sure) as opposed to a brick or a
person or Google Inc. or the words "foo bar".  We interact with it
by reading it (or having it read to us).


-- 
John Cowan <jcowan@r...>     http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith.  --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• References:
  • Re: Re: Why REST? (RE: WSIO- With Name)
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
  • "Abstract" URIs
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: "Abstract" URIs
    • From: Alaric Snell <alaric@a...>
  • URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@a...>
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
  • Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: WSIO vs. Semantic Web
• Next by Date: Re: WSIO vs. Semantic Web
• Previous by thread: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
• Next by thread: Re: URIs are simply names was: Re: "Abstract" URIs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread