W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > March 2004

Re: Making MGET more GET-friendly?

From: David Powell <djpowell@djpowell.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 08:52:50 +0000
Message-ID: <9357194.20040310085250@djpowell.net>
To: Dirk-Willem van Gulik <dirkx@asemantics.com>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Hello Dirk-Willem,

Wednesday, March 10, 2004, 7:56:38 AM, dirkx@asemantics.com wrote in mid:757E8FAE-7268-11D8-B93F-000A95CDA38A@asemantics.com :

> ...

>> How about if it was MANDATORY for responses to MGET to have a

> s/MGET/GET/ perhaps ?

No, I meant MGET here. I was proposing that you could continue to get
the resource using GET http://www.example.com/ex , and that you could
get the resources metadata using MGET http://www.example.com/ex , but
that the MGET would also return a Content-Location header pointing to
http://www.example.com/ex.rdf or
http://sw.example.com/metadata.cgi?url=http:%2f%2fwww.example.com%2fex
which could then be used by GET requests for agents that didn't
support MGET. This would help MGET data to still be part of the wider
web.

I'm not sure whether this would be a valid use of Content-Location,
but a different header could be used for the same purpose if it was
not.

This still assumes a 1:1 relationship between data and metadata, but
it makes getting metadata, and getting remain separate operations
which could have independent access controls.

> ...

-- 
Dave
Received on Wednesday, 10 March 2004 04:00:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 18 February 2014 13:20:06 UTC