HTTP-URI2.html 4.54 KB
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
  <head>
    <meta name="generator" content=
    "HTML Tidy for Mac OS X (vers 31 October 2006 - Apple Inc. build 13), see www.w3.org" />
    <title>
      What do HTTP URIs Identify? - Design Issues
    </title>
    <link rel="Stylesheet" href="di.css" type="text/css" />
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content=
    "text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#DDFFDD" text="#000000" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
    <address>
      Tim Berners-Lee<br />
      Date: 2005-06-09, last change: $Date: 2006/10/29 17:19:39
      $<br />
      Status: personal view only. Editing status: first draft. This
      was written when the W3C Technical Architecture group
      responded TAG issue HTTPRange-14. This resolves the question
      originally addressed in a previous <em><a href=
      "HTTP-URI.html">What to HTTP URIs Identify</a></em> note.
    </address>
    <p>
      <a href="./">Up to Design Issues</a>
    </p>
    <hr />
    <h1>
      What HTTP URIs Identify
    </h1>
    <h2>
      <a name="Abstract" id="Abstract">Abstract</a>
    </h2>
    <p>
      HTTP URIs, in the web architecture, have been used to denote
      documents -- "web pages" informally, or "information
      resources" more formally. However, with the growth of the
      Semantic Web, which uses URIs to denote anything at all, the
      urge to use and practice of using HTTP URIs for arbitrary
      things grew steadily. The W3C Technical Architecture group
      eventually decided to resolve the architectural problem that
      if an HTTP response code of 200 (a successful retrieval) was
      given, that indicated that the URI indeed was for an
      information resource, but with no such response, or with a
      different code, no such assumption could be made. This
      compromise resolved the issue, leaving a consistent
      architecture.
    </p>
    <h2 id="Introducti">
      Introduction
    </h2>
    <p>
      HTTP URIs, in the web architecture, have been used to denote
      documents -- "web pages" informally, or "information
      resources" more formally. However, with the growth of the
      Semantic Web, which uses URIs to denote anything at all, the
      urge to use and practice of using HTTP URIs for arbitrary
      things grew steadily. The Dublin Core project, one of the
      first RDF vocabularies, and later Friend of a Friend, and
      various others simply used HTTP URIs to identify RDF
      Properties. The result was that one could no longer be sure
      that an HTTP URI was intended to identify the web page one
      got when one used the URI in a browser. In fact, there was a
      danger of confusion is one party used the URI for an abstract
      concept and another used it for the web page. The author
      wrote a long <em>Design Issues</em> note about this, <a href=
      "HTTP-URI.html">What do HTTP URIs Identify?</a>. The reader
      is directed to read that if more detail of the arguments is
      needed.
    </p>
    <p>
      This whole issue caused, until 2005, a lot of discussion in
      technical circles, and much heated debate. In June 2005, the
      TAG resolved the issue as a function of the runtime protocol
      response. Basically, the argument is that if you have used a
      URI to get a web page, then you can use the URI to identify
      the Information Resource which is that web page: For example,
      the New York Times home page, or this page you are reading
      now.
    </p>
    <h3 id="Resolution">
      Resolution
    </h3>
    <p>
      The TAG resolution effectively extends the range of things
      one can use HTTP URIs. However, it does not allow one to
      simply serve a web page at a URI which is used for something
      else. Of course, it is a general principle of web
      architecture that it is useful to serve information to those
      that look up a URI. In the case that the URI is not intended
      to be used for an information resource.
    </p>
    <p>
      The W3C Technical Architecture group eventually decided to
      resolve the architectural problem that if an HTTP response
      code of 200 (a successful retrieval) was given, that
      indicated that the URI indeed was for an information
      resource, but with no such response, or with a different
      code, no such assumption could be made. This compromise
      resolved the issue, leaving a consistent architecture.
    </p>
    <hr />
    <p>
      <a href="Overview.html">Up to Design Issues</a>
    </p>
    <p>
      <a href="../People/Berners-Lee">Tim BL</a>
    </p>
  </body>
</html>