- From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 08:17:15 -0400
- To: Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com>
- Cc: nathan@webr3.org, Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 6:05 AM, Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org> wrote: >> This debate has been raging continuously since 2004 or maybe earlier, >> so my first reaction is "not again". > > Well, me too. But I'm now of the opinion that 5 yrs of implementation > experience of httpRange-14 is saying it's an unnecessary overhead and > an impediment to linked data adoption by the mainstream. Talis is > heavily invested in making linked data successful and has a great deal > of implementation experience in infrastructure, publishing and > consumption which is informing the arguments in my post. > >> >> If someone who is following the threads could post a summary here of >> the arguments pro and con, or anything they've learned, when things >> settle down a bit, I would be grateful. >> > > Actually my original blog post attempts to do that, listing out the > current disadvantages of relying on 303 redirects and the principle > advantage of doing it. > > http://iand.posterous.com/is-303-really-necessary > > Ian Thanks, but this is not what I asked. Your post only presents one side of the story and I was hoping to hear "pro and con". On www-tag we have 6 years of impassioned defense of the 200-means-web-page story and hash URIs - did no one come to their defense in the public-lod thread? If not, how did the thread get to be so long? Best Jonathan
Received on Friday, 5 November 2010 12:17:48 UTC