Re: mitigating cost of 303

On Jan 3, 2012, at 20:59, Sandro Hawke wrote:

> On Thu, 2011-12-22 at 13:37 +0000, Steve Harris wrote:
>> FWIW I agree with him that a 303 is a very high cost to pay.
> 
> In confusion or in extra round-trips?
> 
> I have an engineering solution to the latter, which is that hosts be
> allowed to expose (via a .well-known URI) some of the rewrite rules they
> use.   Then, if I (as a client) find myself getting lots of redirects
> from a host, I could look for this redirect-info file, and if it
> appears, I can do the redirects in the client, without talking to the
> server.   
> 
> This wouldn't be only for RDF, but I'd expect only people doing 303 to
> care enough to set this up on their hosts or have their clients look for
> it.
> 
> The hardest engineering part, I think, is figuring out how to encode the
> rewrite rules.  

Weren't you the editor of RIF in RDF [1]?

Regards,
Dave

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_In_RDF


> Each server has its own fancy way of doing it.  Like
> which version of regexps, and how to extract from the pattern space;
> lots of solutions, but we'd need to pick one.   And, tool wise, one
> would eventually like the web servers to automatically serve this file
> based on the rewrite rules they are actually using.   :-)
> 
>   -- Sandro
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 4 January 2012 14:03:05 UTC