W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > November 2010

Re: Is 303 really necessary - demo

From: Jörn Hees <j_hees@cs.uni-kl.de>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 16:21:22 +0100
To: public-lod@w3.org
Message-Id: <201011051621.22594.j_hees@cs.uni-kl.de>
Thanks for the clarification.

As I guess there are quite a lot of people who -- like me -- didn't notice 
this part of your suggestion I'll summarize it like this:

You still want to include a Content-Location field in the header denoting that 
you're actually retrieving a document more precisely an entity from a different 
URI:
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec7.html#sec7

So instead of going for 303 with Location field redirection you simply want to 
provide something with a 200 but tell the enduser "hey, but actually you see 
something from ... here" with the Content-Location field.

For the toucan example see this "parallel mail":
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2010Nov/0153.html

Jörn

PS: I'm out.
Received on Friday, 5 November 2010 15:22:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:29:51 UTC