Re: interesting hash in URLs

T.V Raman wrote:
> ab(use) --- often leads to the discovery of interesting if hacky
> design patterns.
>
> One of the weaknesses in Web Arch is the relative weakness  with
> respect to how client-side fragment identifiers are understood;
> basically the early days of HTML said #idref --- and in some
> sense nothing more has  realy been written down. Compare this to
> the relative richness  in terms of how URL parsing on the
> server-side is defined.
>   
I think Raman does raise an important question that needs to be 
addressed by the Web Arch.  It is easier to understand how it works in 
this particular web application, but what if the returned HTML document 
contains an element that has the same fragment ID.

What is then the correct behavior, then? 
(1) To scroll down to that element 
(2) play the video 
(3) Error message
(4) Do nothing?

Of course a clearly defined meaning on fragment ID is needed.

A related fragment id meaning will come up when the content negotiation is considered.  For instance, what is the relationship between

a) get application/rdf+xml "http://example.com/exp/#something" 
and
b) get text/html "http://example.com/exp/#something"

And if the fragment id is not found by the client, is it like a 404 or somethingelse?
 
Xiaoshu

Received on Friday, 27 July 2007 15:19:22 UTC