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

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... :-)