- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 18:16:47 +0100
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 14.03.2010 18:10, Nathan wrote: > Julian Reschke wrote: >> On 12.03.2010 09:57, Nathan wrote: >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Q1, Can Content-Location be used in the response to a GET or HEAD with >>> any of the 2XX status codes? >> >> I would think so; did you find anything in the spec saying something to >> the contrary? > > no hence why I was asking, because it appeared to conflict with the 3xx > range and conneg; indicating that I could essentially do conneg with a > 200 OK + Content Location. Of course, that's the standard use case. >>> Q2, If I have the same data serialized in two different ways (as in an >>> RDF graph serialized as N3 and as RDF+XML), and those serializations are >>> accessible via a single resource (via a 302 Found + Content-Location); >>> could they share a weak entity tag? >> >> Entity tags are unique only per URI; so they could, but they don't have to. > > What about cache's giving back the wrong media-type, would a change in > media-type be a semantic change of such magnitude that a weak entity tag > couldn't be used (or would be misleading)? I'll let others disagree about that :-) > ... Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 14 March 2010 17:17:33 UTC