IRC log of tagmem on 2003-02-08

Timestamps are in UTC.

00:00:18 [Ian]
===
00:02:11 [Ian]
TB proposal: Delete "Fortunately....to end of 2.1"
00:02:16 [Ian]
s/2.1/2.1.1
00:02:25 [Ian]
CL: There are examples there.
00:02:56 [Ian]
TB: Add an example to the second paragraph to illustrate that point.
00:04:16 [Ian]
Proposal: Make third bullet third para and delete the rest.
00:04:36 [Ian]
TB: The point is that people want to determine that two resources are the same; not currently part of Web arch; people are working on this.
00:05:04 [Ian]
TBL: I'd like to see the various levels of equivalence stated more clearly.
00:06:40 [Ian]
TBL: Please say that you can't tell that two resources different; but that in some situations you can tell that they are the same.
00:06:57 [Ian]
TB: I think that's covered elsewhere.
00:07:05 [Ian]
TBL: The URI draft should not talk about HTTP equivalence.
00:09:03 [Ian]
TB proposed:
00:09:21 [Ian]
- Move some of DanC's slides to this section (or elsewhere).
00:09:27 [Ian]
- Make bullet 3 its own para
00:09:43 [Ian]
- TB to produce new URI EQ draft, possibly pulling DanC slide material
00:09:48 [Ian]
----
00:09:58 [DanC_jam]
for ref, take-aways from my presentation: [[
00:09:59 [DanC_jam]
1. If you mean the same thing, say it the same way.
00:10:00 [DanC_jam]
2. When choosing names for distinct things, choose clearly distinct names
00:10:00 [DanC_jam]
3. Absolute URIs* are the basis of comparison
00:10:00 [DanC_jam]
* w/optional fragments
00:10:00 [DanC_jam]
4. Clients/consumers should not usurp servers'/providers' naming rights
00:10:01 [DanC_jam]
]]
00:10:14 [Roy]
Roy has joined #tagmem
00:10:16 [Ian]
---
00:10:30 [Ian]
2.2.1 comparing identifiers.
00:11:02 [Ian]
TB: Propose to shorten this and reference finding.
00:11:42 [Ian]
TB Proposed at beginning of 2.2: "URIs exist to identify resources. The two operations that can be performed on them are to compare them and to dereference them."
00:11:47 [Ian]
RF: Doesn't google use them for other things?
00:12:52 [Ian]
RF: What about "establish relationships"?
00:14:06 [DanC_jam]
changing "The two primary" to "Two primay..." would do it for me.
00:14:41 [Ian]
IJ: Primary operations may depend on who is doing what. For author, "create links". For spec writer, "Define data type", etc.
00:14:54 [Ian]
IJ: These are also operations on URIs that are about Web arch.
00:17:19 [Chris]
ok but say 'uri reference' and then you can do a syntax check on it ....
00:17:54 [Ian]
IJ: What if we recast this section as "The good thing about the Web is that there are (at least) two useful things that you can do on a URI..."
00:18:56 [Ian]
IJ: I"ll take a whack at this..
00:19:07 [timbl]
timbl has joined #tagmem
00:19:14 [Ian]
[Try to make this less contraining.]
00:19:33 [timbl]
Two important operations on URIs are
00:20:23 [Ian]
TB: Delete first para of "2.2.4. Consistent representations"
00:20:56 [Ian]
DC: The para means to say "Whatever you get back from the HTTP Server is 'correct'"
00:22:16 [Ian]
DC: The world has agreed that what you get back is a valid representation.
00:22:33 [Ian]
TB: Is there such a thing as an invalid representation?
00:25:44 [DanC_jam]
ACTION Connolly: attempt a redrafting of 1st para under 2.2.4
00:27:54 [Roy]
http://www.isr.uci.edu/
00:27:55 [DanC_jam]
RESOLVED: to thank http://www.isr.uci.edu/
00:28:02 [Ian]
IJ: I think we are missing a clear statement of where were are trying to get by the end of section 2. Why are we talking so much about meaning/equivalence/identity? What is the value/importance of being able to say that two resources are the same, or that the meaning of the resource is such and such?
00:28:12 [Ian]
SW: That's why we need a conceptual model up front....
00:28:18 [Ian]
ADJOURNED
00:28:30 [Ian]
RRSAgent, stop