- From: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 17:08:58 -0400
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Pat, thanks for this insightful summary. A comment about a key point is below Pat Hayes: > Seen in this way, the 303 is not so much a 'signal' to the requesting agent that the resource in question is, or might be, a non-information resource - a signal which seems arbitrary, ad-hoc and potentially confusing - but rather simply as an acknowledgement of the fact that a non-information resource cannot *possibly*, by virtue of its very nature, return a direct response to a GET request. I agree with this point and think it is crucial to understand. Having the agent assume the nature of the original URI from a representation which emphatically does *not* describe what is denoted by the original URI seems problematic to me. Frankly, HTTP is a transport protocol, not a knowledge representation and cannot authoritatively dictate the nature of a referent : especially one outside the domain it was primarily setup to support (information resources). Instead, a 303 response should be interpreted as a message (at the level of the protocol) to follow this URL for more useful information and nothing more. Perhaps this caution is in sync with the original 'finding' - I certainly hope so. -- Chimezie
Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2007 21:09:04 UTC