- From: Eyal Oren <eyal.oren@deri.org>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 20:26:50 +0100
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
Hi, I've a question regarding serving RDF content using HTTP 303 redirects. For example, foaf:name [1] redirects to http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec using HTTP 303. The, I believe relevant, RFC 2616 says that HTTP 303 responses MUST NOT be cached, although the result may be cached [2]. Does this mean, that I have to check every single time what foaf:name redirects to? Or am I allowed to remember that foaf:name redirects to its spec? Squid for example will not cache this redirect exactly because it is a 303. Unless I'm misunderstanding something, it seems that when I'm processing lots of documents by de-referencing their URIs, I must dereference foaf:name every single time, only to be redirected to the same location, after which I can use my local copy. Requesting this HTTP header using eg. curl takes around 0.33s, which I'd think is rather a lot when processing thousands of foaf files containing tens of foaf properties each. My question: why are HTTP 303 codes being suggested [3],[4] instead of cacheable response such as 301 or was caching not an issue in drafting these suggestions? -eyal [1] http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name [2] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-vocab-pub/#redirect [4] http://www.dfki.uni-kl.de/~sauermann/2006/11/cooluris/
Received on Monday, 9 July 2007 19:28:09 UTC