forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven Noels <stev...@outerthought.org>
Subject Re: Semantic linking (Re: [VOTE] Usage of file.hint.ext convention)
Date Mon, 02 Sep 2002 15:43:49 GMT
Jeff Turner wrote:

<snip/>

> Rule #1: A resource Identifier (URI) is not the same as a resource
> Representation (HTTP response w/ content type). A resource may have
> multiple representations, but they will all be identified by the same
> URI.

<snip/>

> Ahem. So there you go :) I fondly imagine this sort of thinking was going
> through Steven's head when he -1'ed extra extensions in URIs.

Naaah. It's just that others are much better at clearly expressing their 
thoughts than me, so I'm just decorating my mails with 
important-sounding URLs :-D

<snip type="applause and +1"/>

> I think your "primer.xml" is the same as my "primer". They're both
> identifiers, independent of MIME type. Only difference is, "primer.xml"
> as an identifier would look silly outside a filesystem, eg in an XML db.

Also: think of rendering raw XML example documents.

Yep, I think we should stick to the behaviour described in your mail: 
only name/identifiers in href attrs and optionally overriding the 
context-dependent mimetype/rendition. How should we bind mimetypes with 
rendition extension and URIs?

If you specify a link like this <link href="myfile" 
content-type="text/html">, this should be picked up by the crawler, 
which also needs to create the correct extension - so we need some 
configuration table for this. Also, I assume those are the links that 
will be edited at document creation time, and they still will need to be 
translated to href links for the webapp.

</Steven>
-- 
Steven Noels                            http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
stevenn@outerthought.org                      stevenn@apache.org


Mime
View raw message