- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 11:45:42 +0000
- To: Robert Fuller <robert.fuller@deri.org>
- CC: Leigh Dodds <leigh.dodds@talis.com>, Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, Ian Davis <me@iandavis.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Robert Fuller wrote: > However... with regard to publishing ontologies, we could expect > additional overhead if same content is delivered on retrieving different > Resources for example http://example.com/schema/latitude and > http://example.com/schema/longitude . In such a case ETag could be used > to suggest the contents are identical, but not sure that is a practical > solution. I expect that without 303 it will be more difficult in > particular to publish and process ontologies. Good point which needs discussed more, for instance FOAF returning 200 OK's would be a real PITA and even worse than the 303 pattern, 3**s are definitely advisable in this case. ps: introducing some form of ETag equality wouldn't be the best idea, it may be possible to use Content-Location and ETag together to cache and save doing the second request after a 303 though. Best, Nathan
Received on Friday, 5 November 2010 11:46:54 UTC