W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2009

Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case.

From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 21:54:32 -0800
Cc: "Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com" <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>, "julian.reschke@gmx.de" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "connolly@w3.org" <connolly@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0DF0B686-4AE9-4DE1-9D6D-2C682EA9AF16@creativecommons.org>
To: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>

On Feb 24, 2009, at 9:00 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote:

> I'll separate the two for my next draft and correct this.
> Adding URIQA support in many hosted environments or large corporate  
> deployment isn't simple. It sets a pretty steep threshold on  
> adoption [1]. I actually like the MGET approach a lot, but I can't  
> sell it to 90% of my use cases. Consider me an extreme pragmatists...
> [1] http://www.hueniverse.com/hueniverse/2009/02/the-equal-access-principal.html

I don't know about hosted environments and corporate deployments  
generally, but one thing I like about Link: is that in Apache, at  
least, it can be inserted using a directive in an .htaccess file.


It looks as if the Apache 'script' directive could be used to enable  
URIQA, but it requires installation of a CGI script (or something  
similar), raising the bar a teeny bit (perhaps beyond
what's practical in certain deployments). (Not that .htaccess is  
always permitted to use the header directive anyhow.)


The problem is that I believe both Eran and Patrick, who say  
conflicting things. We have talked a lot about technical merit and  
generalities. Since the questions of practicality and simplicity are  
empirical any hard data pro or con either side would be helpful,  
especially as regards non-Apache platforms.

Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 05:55:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:28 UTC