- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 11:32:14 +0100
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: SWBPD <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > > How does this resolution interact with the legacy use cases that we have? > > <TAG type="RESOLVED"> > > That we provide advice to the community that they may mint > "http" URIs for any resource provided that they follow this > simple rule for the sake of removing ambiguity: > > a) If an "http" resource responds to a GET request with a > 2xx response, then the resource identified by that URI > is an information resource; > > b) If an "http" resource responds to a GET request with a > 303 (See Other) response, then the resource identified > by that URI could be any resource; > > c) If an "http" resource responds to a GET request with a > 4xx (error) response, then the nature of the resource > is unknown. > > </TAG> > > DC? (case b?? or what) > Foaf? (case a and fails???) My Apache2 config got screwed up. http://rdfweb.org/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/xmlns.com/htdocs/foaf/0.1/.htaccess ...used to redirect a bunch, ie. RedirectTemp /foaf/0.1/Group http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/ RedirectTemp /foaf/0.1/Person http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/ ...etc I'm now motivated to fix this up. Wondering also whether to redirect them straight to index.rdf rather than the default index.html (which may eventually be XHTML2 and use RDF/A for the schema stuff). Dan RedirectTemp /foaf/0.1/Agent http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2005 10:32:11 UTC