Re: hash in WebID - cachability problem

On 4 Dec 2012, at 15:10, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:

> 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.

The header of an HTTP redirect can be considered to be data. Now if Nathan is right
in the quote I keep citing from him - reproduced above - then the HTTP spec would be 
saying that one can cache it. 

Mind you I can't find the text above in the HTTPBis specs. Nathan, do you have
the precise URI for that quote?

Henry

> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/