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

Re: Status codes / IR vs. NIR -- 303 vs. 200

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:14:24 +0000
Message-ID: <4CDB1940.4070303@webr3.org>
To: Lars Heuer <heuer@semagia.com>
CC: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
Lars Heuer wrote:
> Hi Nathan,
> [...]
>>> Which solution gives less black spots?
>> fragments, with approx zero black spots (still to see a valid argument
>> against them, vs more than i can list for non fragments)
> Maybe fragments are one solution.

Maybe there isn't a problem to be solved when you use fragments - the 
only reason anybody is even discussing any of this is because people 
introduced a problem by not using fragments to identify things other 
than descriptions.

> The Web isn't a bowl of cherries.


> The question might be: How to cover the Web practically?

By listening to the rest of the web when they tell you that's a 
document/web-page/description and not a toucan, and that they're going 
to keep on calling it what it is regardless of what you say, perhaps.

"It's a painting", "it's a pipe" - no it's a painting of a pipe, a 
visual description of a pipe if you will.

description of a X - the description is a thing.
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2010 22:15:28 UTC

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