- From: Christoph LANGE <ch.lange@jacobs-university.de>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 00:46:17 +0100
- To: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
- Cc: Vyacheslav Zholudev <v.zholudev@jacobs-university.de>, Florian Rabe <f.rabe@jacobs-university.de>
Dear all, in the well-known guides on cool URIs and publishing linked data, there is one thing I don't understand. When doing 303 redirects, there are always three URIs/URLs involved: * U, the URI of the non-information resource (redirects depending on requested MIME type) * U_R, the URL of the RDF information resource * U_H, the URL of the HTML information resource I do understand that it makes sense to have separate URLs for U_R and U_H. Delivering everything, be it RDF or HTML, directly from U (which would technically be possible) would impair cacheability. But why can't we do without U_R and do it like this? * If RDF is requested from U, it is directly served from U * If HTML is requested from U, a 303 redirect to U_H is made. I'd be interested in justifications for the above-mentioned best practice (with 3 URIs/URLs) that are based on semantic considerations and on HTTP architecture. Restrictions imposed by Apache's standard plugins are not relevant to me. Cheers, and thanks in advance, Christoph -- Christoph Lange, Jacobs Univ. Bremen, http://kwarc.info/clange, Skype duke4701
Received on Tuesday, 26 January 2010 23:46:30 UTC