- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:13:22 -0500
- To: "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>
- Cc: "Miles, AJ (Alistair)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>, public-swbp-wg@w3.org
* Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com> [2006-01-23 16:00-0500] > > > > From: Alistair Miles > > . . . > > Ralph raised the point that simply asking OCLC to change 302 > > to 303 for all responses by the PURL server is not a > > reasonable solution, because a 302 "Found" response code is > > actually quite appropriate for the majority of purl.org URIs. > > Yes. Maybe purl.org could offer registrants the choice when a URI is > registered, to indicate whether they want their URI to forward using 302 > or 303. It ought to be possible for folks to change their mind later. The PURL software is in Perl and freely downloadable from http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/purl/download.htm (hmm I thought it was Perl, but I guess Iremembered wrong, they have precompiled version for various Unix variants - maybe it bundles Apache?). If someone had the cycles to write a (hopefully small and easy to review) patch for the PURL code, maybe purl.org would be more likely to make the change. I'd love to take a look but don't have time right now. Anyone else feeling purlish? Dan
Received on Monday, 23 January 2006 21:13:27 UTC