- From: Ed Davies <edavies@nildram.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:51:03 +0100
- To: Technical Architecture Group WG <www-tag@w3.org>
Stuart Williams wrote: > At their meeting in 16th July 2007 [1] the TAG resolved to create a new issue, > HttpRedirections-57 as a response to a community request [2] that we give further > consideration to the use of the HTTP 303 status codes *and* other possible > mechanisms of obtaining a description of a resource (typically a non-information > resource) where the referenced resource is not capable of providing representations > of itself. Why is this issue limited to resources which are not capable of providing representations of themselves? Suppose I access RFC 2068 [1] and think, hmm, this web stuff looks interesting, I wonder if it'll catch on? My first thought would be to check on the standardization state of RFC 2068 and whether or not it's been obsoleted. The RFC editors are pretty good about not messing with published documents so they don't update the text with this information, and anyway it is plain text so it's difficult for my browser plugins to take me directly to the relevant information (it seems to be a bit much to expect a few lines of JavaScript to work out the meaning of 'Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol.'). What I'd like to have my browser do is ask the server for some metadata about the document - i.e., to get the URI I would get back in a 303 if this was a non-information resource. In general, there are a number of resource types and content types for which the author cannot or does not want to include metadata or links to metadata in the returned entity but for which it would be useful to be able to provide such data. Two mechanisms spring to mind. One would be to add a new method to HTTP, GET-META perhaps, which either returns the metadata directly or its URI. (I'm not sure whether it would be best: to allow one, the other or either.) Another would be to add a standard response header (SeeAlso:, perhaps) which could be used with normal GET or HEAD methods and which would contain the URI of the metadata. However, maybe there's a less intrusive way to get this effect. [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2068.txt
Received on Monday, 27 August 2007 10:53:59 UTC