Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Tim Bray wrote: > Joshua Allen wrote: > >> On the other hand, it is exceedingly poor form to use identifiers from >> the HTTP scheme for things which you don't intend to be dereferenced >> (via HTTP synchronous GET, no less). > > > You might be on to something here. > > How about for things that you don't have any representations for right > now but plan to in the near future? How about things that you don't > have any way of representing right now, but you might someday? What > are some things that fall into the category "which you don't intend to > be dereferenced"? -Tim Thanks Tim - I guess that answers the question I just sent ;-) But I would have thought that a more elegant solution in the cases you cite above would merely be to model those future dereferencable resources as a property of the original non-dereferancable resource - if and when they come on-line? Murray -- Murray Spork Centre for Information Technology Innovation (CITI) The Redcone Project Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia Phone: +61-7-3864-9488 Email: m.spork@q... Web: http://redcone.gbst.com/
|
