W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2003

Re: RDF Queries in HTTP "Range" Headers

From: Kevin Smathers <kevin.smathers@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 06:57:20 -0700
Message-ID: <3EDCA940.2090905@hp.com>
To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
Cc: "Seaborne, Andy" <Andy_Seaborne@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Sean B. Palmer wrote:

>>An alternative to using HTTP "Range" is to use the
>>query string of a GET.
>>    
>>
>
>Quite, although one has to balance the advantage of addressability
>with the disadvantage of not having 304 Not Modified ('stead of 206
>Partial Content) returned on failures. This means that the query would
>have to be repeated by the client, though one might want to do so even
>using Range queries... With both methods there are some minor privacy
>issues, of course, but one isn't *forced* to use server side querying,
>so that's okay.
>

Assuming that you have some way of calculating the '304 Not Modified', 
there is nothing in a CGI that precludes returning that result from a 
query string, but not from a Range header.  Unless you are suggesting 
that the web server can calculate 304 results even for a queried range, 
without the help of an RDF gateway?

Cheers,
-kls


-- 
========================================================
   Kevin Smathers                kevin.smathers@hp.com    
   Hewlett-Packard               kevin@ank.com            
   Palo Alto Research Lab                                 
   1501 Page Mill Rd.            650-857-4477 work        
   M/S 1135                      650-852-8186 fax         
   Palo Alto, CA 94304           510-247-1031 home        
========================================================
use "Standard::Disclaimer";
carp("This message was printed on 100% recycled bits.");
Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2003 09:58:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:59 GMT