# Re: Re SGML URC spec comments

Brian Behlendorf (brian@organic.com)
Mon, 26 Jun 1995 11:31:15 -0700 (PDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: weibel@oclc.org: "Stockholm Metadata BOF"
- Previous message: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Re SGML URC spec comments"
- In reply to: Terry Allen: "Re: Re SGML URC spec comments"

    Date: Mon, 26 Jun 1995 11:31:15 -0700 (PDT)

    From: Brian Behlendorf <brian@organic.com>

    Subject: Re: Re SGML URC spec comments

    To: Terry Allen <terry@ora.com>

    In-Reply-To: <9506260749.ZM28936@dmg.west.ora.com>

    Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9506261158.w10466-0100000@eat.organic.com>

On Mon, 26 Jun 1995, Terry Allen wrote:
> Brian:
> | It would be nice if the author/server *could* provide a pointer to those
> | SOAPs (man, two levels of indirection) as a service. This would imply
> | the SOAP-creation agent would send some sort of notification to the
> | original dociument's server, which could be ignored if the server doesn't
> | want to support it.
>
> How, if the SOAP is created after the doc, the author goes away, the
> author is unaware of the SOAP, etc? Don't assume that the author or
> publisher 1) distributes the doc, 2) resolves URNs for it, 3) cares,
> 4) is alive or in existence, 5) has gone away but has provided for
> a successor.

Cut me some slack, Terry :) I'm not assuming anything. I'm suggesting
that on a voluntary basis it would be nice for the HTTP-object to be able
to also express to the browser/viewer that various SOAPs/global
annotations have been applied to it. I dunno, maybe I'm in the minority,
but it would seem to be a crucial step in making the web chmod a+w. :)

I'll go read some more of the URI archives and the scenerios document
again.

Brian

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
brian@organic.com brian@hyperreal.com http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/

- Next message: weibel@oclc.org: "Stockholm Metadata BOF"
- Previous message: Ronald E. Daniel: "Re: Re SGML URC spec comments"
- In reply to: Terry Allen: "Re: Re SGML URC spec comments"