Re: A(nother) Guide to Publishing Linked Data Without Redirects

Hi Jeremy,

I think you mean "what does an HTML document containing RDFa return"?  If so, 200 of course :)

Regards,
Dave




On Nov 11, 2010, at 18:23, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

> 
> Hi David
> 
> what does an RDFa document return, 200 or 210?
>  or maybe somewhere in between (depending on how much RDFa :) )
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> On 11/10/2010 2:26 PM, David Wood wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Apologies for cross-posting, but I am curious what the membership of this distribution thinks about the practical difficulties associated with the use of 303 redirection and the problems explaining it to non-SemWebbers.  At the risk of drawing others into an already active debate on another list, your feedback would be welcome.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>>> From: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
>>> Date: November 10, 2010 17:15:36 EST
>>> To: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
>>> Subject: A(nother) Guide to Publishing Linked Data Without Redirects
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I've collected my thoughts on The Great 303 Debate of 2010 (as it will be remembered) at:
>>>  http://prototypo.blogspot.com/2010/11/another-guide-to-publishing-linked-data.html
>>> 
>>> Briefly, I propose a new HTTP status code (210 Description Found) to disambiguate between generic information resources and the special class of information resources that provide metadata descriptions about URIs addressed.
>>> 
>>> My proposal is basically the same as posted earlier to this list, but significantly updated to include a mechanism to allow for the publication of Linked Data using a new HTTP status code on Web hosting services.                Several poorly thought out corner cases were also dealt with.
>>> 
>>> I look forward to feedback from the community.  However, if you are about to say something like, "the Web is just fine as it is", then I will have little patience.  We invent the Web as we go and need not be artificially constrained.  The Semantic Web is still young enough to be done right (or "more right", or maybe "somewhat right").
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>