W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2009

Re: comments on draft-nottingham-http-link-header-04

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:55:31 +0100
Message-ID: <49A7B893.7010907@gmx.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Ah, you've rumbled my secret plan for a link relation caching startup; 
> ah well, there's still DTDs, XML Namespaces and the like out there.
> 
> I'll have a think about this; I agree that SHOULD is too strong, but it 
> would be nice to allow the semweb people to do what they need to if they 
> really want to. At the moment, I'm thinking about making the entire 
> thing non-normative; i.e., shoulds instead of SHOULD. I'll try to float 
> some proposed text in a little while.s

...but my understanding was that at least *some* of the semweb community 
want link relations NOT to be "information" resources, thus expect a 
303, not 200 (*). I think avoiding this discussion would be good.

BR, Julian

PS: I wouldn't worry about that until the W3C manages to respond with 
303 for XML namespace URIs... :-)
Received on Friday, 27 February 2009 09:56:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:01 GMT