FYI, it was precisely this reason that XRI 2.0 OASIS votes were shot down by W3C TAG. <br>(Besides xri: scheme). The discussion between XRI TC and W3C TAG led to the <br>conclusion that XRI spec will use 303 (with link header, if needed) instead of 302 redirect. <br>
<br>=nat<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:eran@hueniverse.com">eran@hueniverse.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
This does not imply anything with regard to my own position on this matter but I figured people on this list might find the latest debate [1] over the W3C TAG httpRange-14 issue interesting.<br>
<br>
Basically according to the httpRange-14 decision, a URI cannot represent both a 'person' and an 'information resource' (i.e. a blog). A blog must return HTTP 200 while a URI for a person should not, but return a 303 instead. This is a very important architectural principal of the semantic web according to the W3C TAG.<br>
<br>
The recent debate is about URIs for relationships (as in the value of a rel attribute in a Link header or element). The W3C TAG want the IANA not to serve 200 responses for relationship URIs, but 303s. It is a fascinating discussion, even if you think it is closer to an episode of Melrose Place than a technical accomplishment...<br>
<br>
EHL<br>
<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jan/0114.html" target="_blank">http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Jan/0114.html</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
specs mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:specs@openid.net">specs@openid.net</a><br>
<a href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs" target="_blank">http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Nat Sakimura (=nat)<br><a href="http://www.sakimura.org/en/">http://www.sakimura.org/en/</a><br>