W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > March 2006

[VM] Action to add 303-redirect reference

From: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 10:49:42 +0100
To: SW Best Practices <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20060305094942.GA1016@Octavius>

Dear all,

This is in response to an action on me from Feb 20.
Unfortunately, I have a meeting on Monday at the time of
the telecon so must send regrets.  The next VM telecon is
scheduled for Friday, 17 March, so perhaps we should try to
work this out beforehand on the list.

> [NEW] ACTION: Tom find a place for the footnote on "simplest" recipe
> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/02/20-swbp-minutes.html#action16]

This refers to a point addressed David Booth's "re-review"
[1] of the Cookbook [2]:

    Recipe 2 says it is the "simplest possible configuration", but this
    is true only if the URIs have already been fixed.  (And if they have,
    then it is likely that the adminstrator has already configured their
    server appropriately, and thus is not in need of this cookbook.)
    However, if a 303-redirect service (such as thing-described-by.org or
    t-d-b.org) is used, the server configuration is clearly easier and less
    error-prone, because it only requires that the server send the correct
    MIME type, which the server may already do anyway.  The 303-redirect
    service does the rest.  In particular, the use of a 303-redirect

        - Does not require the coordinated maintenance of two URIs
        (the original versus the forwarding location)

        - Does not require URI rewriting (except to add .rdf extension
        if desired).

        - Does not require that MultiViews be disabled.

        - Does not require that a particular directory NOT exist.

    The idea of using a 303-redirect service is quite new, and I would not
    want to imply that the practice is more accepted or widespread than it
    currently is -- indeed, thus far I only heard one person on a previous
    teleconference say that they are using it -- but I do think it is
    important to at least acknowledge it as an option, since it *is* a
    simpler approach.  Perhaps something like an editors' note would be

For a more detailed explanation of the "303-redirect service"
approach, see the SWBPD thread starting at [3].

The suggestion from David is to insert a sentence or footnote
acknowledging the "303-redirect service" approach in the
context of saying that some of the recipes described in
the cookbook are "simplest possible configurations" (on the
grounds that use of a 303-redirect service is even simpler).
David points to its use in Recipe 2 [4], but the claim is
also made for Recipe 1 [5], and, more generally, in the
introductory section "Choosing a Recipe" [6].

In order to make sense to the reader, however, the notion
of "303-redirect service" would need to be introduced
and explained _before_ the sentence saying that,
configuration-wise, it is the simplest.  For example, a
reference be made to this approach at the end of the section
"URI Namespaces" [7] -- right after the presentation of hash
and slash namespaces [8].  The text there could say:

    <p>Readers should be aware of a third type of
    vocabulary URI under discussion at the time of
    writing: URIs based on a 303-redirect service such
    as http://thing-described-by.org.  Though simpler to
    implement than approach described in this document, the
    303-redirect approach has not yet been implemented for
    stable, published RDF vocabularies and is not used in any
    of the following recipes.  <a href="appendixb">Appendix
    B</a> describes this approach in more detail.</p>

Following Appendix A ("Vocabularies that use PURL"), then,
Appendix B could say:

    <h2 id="redirect">Appendix B. Vocabulary URIs based on
    a 303-redirect service</h2>

    <p>URIs of this type are formed by appending the
    URI of a descriptive resource as a query string
    to the base URI of a 303-redirect service such
    as "http://thing-described-by.org".  The domain
    thing-described-by.org delegates authority for defining
    the meaning of such a query URI to the domain cited in
    the query string (i.e., the part following a question

    <p>In principle, then, one might coin the URI
    as an identifier for the Foo vocabulary.  An HTTP GET
    request against the URI for the Foo vocabulary, or against
    a property or class in the Foo vocabulary, would result
    in a response code of 303, thus conforming to the second
    of the two <minimum requirements> articulated below for
    the publication of RDF vocabularies.  If, in addition,
    the URI "http://example.org/foo" were to identify an
    authoritative RDF description for the vocabulary, and the
    server providing that description were to return a MIME
    type properly identifying it as such, then the use of
    could be said to conform to first of the <minimum
    requirements> as well.</p>

I have not yet plugged this text into the draft as I thought
it might be more productive to discuss it here first.


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2006Feb/0109.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0045.html
[4] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/#recipe2
[5] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/#recipe1
[6] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/#choosing
[7] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/#naming
[8] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/#slash
[9] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/#minimumrequirements

Dr. Thomas Baker                      baker@sub.uni-goettingen.de
SUB - Goettingen State                            +49-551-39-3883
and University Library                           +49-30-8109-9027
Papendiek 14, 37073 Göttingen
Received on Sunday, 5 March 2006 09:46:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:18 UTC