Re: Is 303 really necessary?

On 11/28/2010 02:52 PM, Giovanni Tummarello wrote:
>> - the rest of the web continue to use 200
>>
>> Tim
> 
> yes but the rest of the web will use 200 also to show what we would
> consider 208, e.g.
> 
> http://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/antonio_banderas/
> 
> see the trilples
> http://inspector.sindice.com/inspect?url=http://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/antonio_banderas/#TRIPLES
> 
> http://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/antonio_banderas/
> 
> is clearly a web page but its also an actor, it is pointed by their
> graph in other pages as such and the same page contains the opengraph
> triple  "type" "actor"
> 
> We should not get ourself in the position to have to try to evangelize
> all to change something for reasons that are really not apparent to
> your normal web world. I think the solution we should be seeking
> consider RDFa publishing via normal 200 code as the example above
> absolutely ok
> 
> an agent would then be able to distinguish which properties apply to
> the "page" and which to the "actor" looking at the.. properties
> themselves i guess?  sad but possibly unavoidable?
> 
> Giovanni

Hi,
I agree with this.
This problem is caused that Linked Data conflates identifiers with
locators - important is that one can get information about a unique
name, by using it as a locator. The issue whether some events in the
process or outcome of the information retrieval somehow should affect
users perception of the name (is it a document or xyz?) is a can of
worms most implementers don't want to tackle and they have a point. I
don't want to maintain all apps I once coded so they support whatever is
the latest HTTP semantics trend is, when there is a widely used standard
for extensible, *evolvable* information representation (RDF) which I am
already expecting to receive about the name I am retrieving info about.
So lets not presume that by dereferencing an URI and getting back a
document, the URI is the documents identifier - it is its locator. It
can be its identifier too, but lets leave that for publishers to decide
- that has been the point of my previous post on the topic (
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2010Nov/0325.html )

Best regards,
Jiří Procházka