RE: Uniform access to descriptions

>>
If :MysteryType is awww:InformationResource, then there is no problem.  But
if :MysteryType is sumo:Human, and sumo:Human is disjoint with
awww:InformationResource, then there is a URI collision, because in essense,
the 200 response implicitly declared URI http://example/mycat as denoting an
awww:InformationResource, whereas the RDF content declared URI
http://example/mycat as denoting a sumo:Human.  In such case the URI owner
has done something wrong, but whether you consider the error to be a misuse
of content negotiation or something else is a matter of interpretation:
however you choose to atribute the cause, the parts don't fit together.
<<

What if the 200 in question returned a Content-Location: /mycat.html,
different than the Uri, so that you could assert your 200 <=> IR on
/mycat.html? RDF could then describe /mycat quite happily.

Seb