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