W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Explaining the benefits of http-range14 (was Re: [HTTP-range-14] Hyperthing: Semantic Web URI Validator (303, 301, 302, 307 and hash URIs) )

From: Leigh Dodds <leigh.dodds@talis.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 08:04:44 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJgK0KHJ5AGNY3_q++52zq2h6h3Up1CudfJTASWMwwzVM=u2Nw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
Cc: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
Hi Dave,

Thanks for the response, there's some good examples in there. I'm glad
that this thread is bearing fruit :)

I had a question about one aspect, please excuse the clipping:

On 20 October 2011 10:34, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
> If you have two resources and later on it turns out you only needed one,
> no big deal just declare their equivalence. If you have one resource
> where later on it turns out you needed two then you are stuffed.

Ed referred to "refactoring". So I'm curious about refactoring from a
single URI to two. Are developers necessarily stuffed, if they start
with one and later need two?

For example, what if I later changed the way I'm serving data to add a
Content-Location header (something that Ian has raised in the past,
and Michael has mentioned again recently) which points to the source
of the data being returned.

Within the returned data I can include statements about the document
at that URI referred to in the Content-Location header.

Doesn't that kind of refactoring help?

Presumably I could also just drop in a redirect and adopt the current
303 pattern without breaking anything?

Again, I'm probably missing something, but I'm happy to admit
ignorance if that draws out some useful discussion :)



Leigh Dodds
Product Lead, Kasabi
Mobile: 07850 928381

Talis Systems Ltd
43 Temple Row
B2 5LS
Received on Friday, 21 October 2011 07:05:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:21:17 UTC