W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2012

Re: Call for proposals to amend the "httpRange-14 resolution"

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 16:08:59 -0600
Cc: Tim Bannister <isoma@jellybaby.net>, SWIG Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Message-Id: <032F6400-3E53-4101-90CE-EEAA42092CD4@ihmc.us>
To: Jonathan A Rees <rees@mumble.net>

On Mar 7, 2012, at 10:54 AM, Jonathan A Rees wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Tim Bannister <isoma@jellybaby.net> wrote:
> 
>> In my view, if a GET for a URI returns content then it is a web document (or information resource, if you prefer). Using 204 and Link: just fits in better with how I understand the web.
> 
> Just to be clear, *which* web document or IR? That is, how do you feel
> about the Flickr and Jamendo cases, where the URI is used to refer to
> an IR described by the content retrieved using GET, but is not similar
> to the content retrieved using GET?

That sounds like it is consistent with a 303 response but not to a 200-x, according to what http-range-14 *ought* to have said. Which was, of course, that a 200-x response means that the URI denotes *the IR that emitted the response*, not just some IR or other. (What an incredible example of a fumbled ball.)

Pat


------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2012 22:09:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:48 GMT