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

Re: Is 303 really necessary?

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 12:36:16 -0400
Message-ID: <4CD43280.8050407@openlinksw.com>
To: Ian Davis <me@iandavis.com>
CC: Norman Gray <norman@astro.gla.ac.uk>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
On 11/5/10 11:12 AM, Ian Davis wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Norman Gray<norman@astro.gla.ac.uk>  wrote:
>> httpRange-14 requires that a URI with a 200 response MUST be an IR; a URI with a 303 MAY be a NIR.
>>
>> Ian is (effectively) suggesting that a URI with a 200 response MAY be an IR, in the sense that it is defeasibly taken to be an IR, unless this is contradicted by a self-referring statement within the RDF obtained from the URI.
> Thank you for writing this - it's exactly what I mean.
>
> Ian
>
>

For everyone else: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defeasible_reasoning :-)

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Friday, 5 November 2010 16:36:44 UTC

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