- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 19:25:08 -0400
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Richard Cyganiak<richard@cyganiak.de> wrote: > 3. If a resource has a representation, then a GET to its URI should be > answered by 200. If not, then 303, 404 or 410 would be fine choices. This *should* is not warranted. As there is often no way to include structured information *about* a resource in-band of the representation (sense http/awww), or to include it in a way that is predictable by the requester, is a perfectly reasonable choice to use 303 to interpose and therefore provide a way of supplying this "about" information. In those cases where someone is confident enough that a 200 response would have been appropriate, that one can supply information *about* the resource (in RDF, for instance) means that there is an opportunity to indicate (with the potential for being much more precise than http) where that "representation" can be fetched from. -Alan
Received on Saturday, 11 July 2009 23:26:20 UTC