- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 09:10:41 -0500
- To: public-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <50BE0461.8030309@openlinksw.com>
On 12/4/12 8:06 AM, Henry Story wrote: > I know those URIs are cacheable. That was not the point of the discussion. We were speaking about the cacheability of what you call the entitiy uris, (e.g.http://dbpedia.org/resource/Berlin ) which HTTPBis allows: > > HTTPBis says: > "A 303 response SHOULD NOT be cached unless it is indicated as cacheable by Cache-Control or Expires header fields." > > I was just pointing out that DBPedia does not take that possibility into account, which it could. > If you look at what I am saying, I am in fact giving you plenty of good ways to improve your arguments. You don't cache Names, you cache Data. Bye, again. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2012 14:11:11 UTC