W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > November 2010

Re: Is 303 really necessary?

From: Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 16:21:15 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=vdgqqHQbRTiJ+WsdZcufd2cmxexuOrV=Xr=ZR@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Davis <me@iandavis.com>
Cc: public-lod <public-lod@w3.org>
Hi Ian

no its not needed see this discussion
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2007Jul/0086.html
pointing to 203 406 or thers..

..but a number of social community mechanisms will activate if you
bring this up, ranging from russian style "you're being antipatriotic
criticizing the existing status quo " to "..but its so deployed now"
and ".. you're distracting the community from other more important
issues ", none of this will make sense if analized by proper logical
means of course (e.g. by a proper IT manager in a proper company, paid
based on actual results).

But the core of the matter really is : who cares. My educated guess
looking at Sindice flowing data is that everyday out of 100 new sites
on  web of data 99.9 simply use RDFa which doesnt have this issue.

choose how to publish yourself but here is another one. If you chose
NOT to use RDFa you will miss out on anything which will enhance the
user experience based on annotations. As an example see our entry in
the  semantic web challange [1].

Giovanni

[1] http://www.cs.vu.nl/~pmika/swc/submissions/swc2010_submission_19.pdf



On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Ian Davis <me@iandavis.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The subject of this email is the title of a blog post I wrote last
> night questioning whether we actually need to continue with the 303
> redirect approach for Linked Data. My suggestion is that replacing it
> with a 200 is in practice harmless and that nothing actually breaks on
> the web. Please take a moment to read it if you are interested.
>
> http://iand.posterous.com/is-303-really-necessary
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ian
>
>
Received on Thursday, 4 November 2010 15:21:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:16:09 UTC