Re: Review of new HTTPbis text for 303 See Other

Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> Thanks Larry. I wish I could talk with such clarity.
> I want to take the discussion with Pat a bit further, but will do so 
> off-list. (Tomorrow, Pat -- I need to mull it over a bit.)
> I initially joined the thread to say this: The HTTP spec, with Roy's 
> proposed new 303 text, accommodates all Semantic Web use cases I can 
> think of. Including using HTTP URIs to denote people. It's good to see 
> httpRange-14 slowly "trickle down" into the specs.
If this is your purpose, I believe that you do need to mull it over 
before talking to Pat.   Pat was trying to give httpRange-14 some wiggle 
room  while you, who I have always thought to be a staunch supporters of 
httpRange-14, was trying to prevent.

This raises an even bigger issue because it seems to me that, how you 
have interpreted the principle of orthogonal specification seems quite 
different from Pat's (I guess).  What the principle of orthogonal 
specification supports is not a layering architecture but a scalable 
architecture.  In other words, the semantic of one specification must be 
independent of the other.  This is where httpRange-14 breaks because it 
tempers the semantics of *200* code, which, by httpRange-14, relies on 
the nature of resource.  303 is not critical because its semantics is 
for all purpose, hence always *politically* correct.

Darn, no wonder I was confused.  I honestly don't know what you two were 
fighting about. :-)


Received on Wednesday, 15 July 2009 02:17:44 UTC