W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2010

Re: FW: "Is 303 Really Necessary?"

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 19:42:26 +0000
Message-ID: <4CD30CA2.6080003@webr3.org>
To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
CC: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Jonathan Rees wrote:
> This debate has been raging continuously since 2004 or maybe earlier,
> so my first reaction is "not again".
> 
> If someone who is following the threads could post a summary here of
> the arguments pro and con, or anything they've learned, when things
> settle down a bit, I would be grateful.

Think the only really difference this time is the general notion that 
303 makes no difference since most clients black box the HTTP and just 
use the URI in the original GET whilst human users click the URI then 
c+p the 303 redirected to one to use later.

In other words humans are saying the doc is the thing, and machines are 
saying the thing is the doc!

So general theme of convo is to just use different URIs for different 
things and ignore HTTP all together. Ala:
  </me> :isDescribedBy </doc> .

Which brings one back to the original problem that when you stick the 
graph together you'll see that both </me> and </doc> are said to be a 
:Document.

However! main difference this time is that 303 isn't preventing this 
often, so it's just adding more problems. When you remove 303 at least 
the humans use the correct URIs, and you've got 1 HTTP GET rather than 2.
Received on Thursday, 4 November 2010 19:43:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:28 GMT