Re: httpRange-14 Change Proposal

On 3/25/2012 3:37 PM, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
>   x 303 ->  y means   "y is a description of x" and therefore y is an information resource.

My point is: that's a perfectly coherent definition for 303 in principle, 
but I don't read RFC 2616 as saying that. I read RFC 2616 as saying, "If 
you were interested in x, then y is something that you might want to >see 
also<". Now if (the representation of) y happens to be an RDF document that 
happens to make statements about x, terrific. I'm fine encouraging that 
idiom. I'm a bit nervous about saying: "by the way, if y were to turn out 
to be anything other than such a description, than that 303 is certainly an 
error". Where are the normative specs supporting that conclusion?


Received on Sunday, 25 March 2012 20:54:15 UTC