At 3:01 PM +0100 10/27/02, Julian Reschke wrote:
>IMHO: it can be a resource without an URI actually been assigned to it. The
>essential thing is that you *could* assign that URI.
OK. That makes some sense. What do you mean by the word "could"? Doie
sit require that we could use existing schemes and syntaxes to assign
a URI? or merely that such a scheme is conceivable?
For example, in an analogous situation, would it be OK to consider a
particular group of frames with particular documents in each frame a
resource, even though there's not as yet any URI that can point to
them? (I'm thinking pre-XFrames here.)
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
