- From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:22:09 -0600
- To: msabin@interx.com
- cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> I'm happy with the use of Content-Location: as a mechanism for > resolving ambiguity between retrievable referents (eg. for variant > representation selection), but it doesn't solve the whole problem. I know this is an RDF list, not an HTTP one, but I've read the RFC and still need to sure I am clear on this particular discussion of Content-Location. The RFC seems to hint at the use of C-L more in the situation of variant representations (I imagine havinf an HTML, XHTML and SVG version of a page, all returning a single C-L header so the UA knows they are just variant representations). Mark, can you provide some pointers that clarify the IMHO different use you are discussing in your examples? i.e. doing the job that I would normally assign to temporary redirects. Thanks. -- Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc. uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com http://fourthought.com http://4Suite.org http://uche.ogbuji.net Track chair, XML/Web Services One (San Jose, Boston): http://www.xmlconference.com/ RDF Query using Versa - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-thi nk10/index.html WSDL and the Wild, Wild West - http://adtmag.com/article.asp?id=6004 XML, The Model Driven Architecture, and RDF @ XML Europe - http://www.xmleurope.com/2002/kttrack.asp#themodel
Received on Saturday, 27 April 2002 00:31:20 UTC