On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Richard Wallis < richard.wallis@dataliberate.com> wrote: > I presume the server doing the 301 is going to stay around for a while. This is at least part of the problem. In theory, LOD clients should cache a 301 (unless specifically instructed not to) and resolve the target URI in future requests. Eventually non-bot requests to the original URI would diminish to 0 and the original resource could go away without distributed harm. In practical terms, this seems unlikely to be the case any time in the future. I may have missed it, but there seems to be very little discussion about this issue [4][5]. For instance, clients of DNS [1], PURL [2], and URL [3] shortening services will encounter different flavors of redirection. Does anyone know of good resources describing either best practices or "rules of the road" behavior for response caching and redirects for both LOD clients and servers? Jon Phipps, who hopes everyone will consider this post an informal apology for the 'DC:Terns' post. [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2672 [2] http://3roundstones.com/led_book/led-wood.html [3] http://searchengineland.com/analysis-which-url-shortening-service-should-you-use-17204 [4] http://webofdata.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/linked-open-data-http-caching/ [5] http://onebiglibrary.net/story/caching-and-proxying-linked-data
Received on Friday, 20 April 2012 12:54:48 UTC