- From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: 09 Jun 2003 11:42:39 -0400
- To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Cc: WWW-Tag <www-tag@w3.org>
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 20:04, Tim Bray wrote:
> Will soon show up at http://www.tbray.org/tag/wa-c4.html. Since I wrote
> it on a plane, I didn't get around to embedding URIs for all the RFC and
> other references. So this definitely needs an editing pass. There are
> placeholders for text from Chris on form/content/interaction, and from
> Norm on embedding hyperlinks. Lots more editing is required.
Hi Tim,
Thanks for writing this. I have a couple of thoughts:
1) I would like to see the text highlight what is most relevant
to the Web (Architecture). You do this in a number of places:
- In 4.1: register your MIME types
- In 4.4: use URI refs as identifiers
I think that there should be more along those lines, and that text
that does not do this should be pruned (or made more Web-relevant).
For example, why is statement about the importance of well-specified
error-handling specific to the Web Arch? Is there something about
the Web that makes a particular kind of error handling important?
Similarly, what is it about the Web that most affects one choice
between a binary or a text format?
I certainly don't mind using the categories you've suggested,
but I think the text should be more specific to the Web.
2) A number of the sections should have references to relevant
TAG issues (e.g., link to binaryXML-30 in section
in binary v. textual).
- Ian
--
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel: +1 718 260-9447
Received on Monday, 9 June 2003 11:42:43 UTC