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

Re: FW: "Is 303 Really Necessary?"

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 12:34:40 +0000
Message-ID: <4CD3F9E0.7040202@webr3.org>
To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
CC: Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com>, Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
Jonathan Rees wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 6:05 AM, Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org> wrote:
>>> This debate has been raging continuously since 2004 or maybe earlier,
>>> so my first reaction is "not again".
>> Well, me too. But I'm now of the opinion that 5 yrs of implementation
>> experience of httpRange-14 is saying it's an unnecessary overhead and
>> an impediment to linked data adoption by the mainstream. Talis is
>> heavily invested in making linked data successful and has a great deal
>> of implementation experience in infrastructure, publishing and
>> consumption which is informing the arguments in my post.
>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>> Actually my original blog post attempts to do that, listing out the
>> current disadvantages of relying on 303 redirects and the principle
>> advantage of doing it.
>>
>> http://iand.posterous.com/is-303-really-necessary
>>
>> Ian
> 
> Thanks, but this is not what I asked. Your post only presents one side
> of the story and I was hoping to hear "pro and con". On www-tag we
> have 6 years of impassioned defense of the 200-means-web-page story
> and hash URIs - did no one come to their defense in the public-lod
> thread? If not, how did the thread get to be so long?

Many have said words to the effect of "you use slash URIs so do what you 
want, but we use fragments because 200-means-web-page", defended fragids 
and said "don't go telling people that /slash uris with 200 is a good 
idea", but I think general sentiment from all those who would and do 
fight for the use of fragments, is that it would be wasted breathe, 
they're not going to change URIs (cool URIs don't change) and never 
wanted the 303 in the first place, 303 does make life less-nice, so they 
want shot of it.

It's a one way path here, it's clear the message from some is "we're 
sticking with non-frag URIs for things" the only room for change is to 
200 rather than 303, and this will happen.

Here's the first demo (200 OK):
   http://iandavis.com/2010/303/toucan

argument being "does this break the web" - answer is obviously no, so 
excuse granted and on they go. Ignoring the effects on their data within 
the web scale graph.

Best,

Nathan
Received on Friday, 5 November 2010 12:35:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:29 GMT