[httpRange-14] Resolved

As everyone here knows, the TAG has spent a great deal of time
discussing the httpRange-14 issue, as described at

    http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#httpRange-14

I am happy to report that we came up with a reasonable
compromise solution at the recent TAG f2f meeting at MIT.

<TAG type="RESOLVED">

That we provide advice to the community that they may mint
"http" URIs for any resource provided that they follow this
simple rule for the sake of removing ambiguity:

   a) If an "http" resource responds to a GET request with a
      2xx response, then the resource identified by that URI
      is an information resource;

   b) If an "http" resource responds to a GET request with a
      303 (See Other) response, then the resource identified
      by that URI could be any resource;

   c) If an "http" resource responds to a GET request with a
      4xx (error) response, then the nature of the resource
      is unknown.

</TAG>

I believe that this solution enables people to name arbitrary
resources using the "http" namespace without any dependence on
fragment vs non-fragment URIs, while at the same time providing
a mechanism whereby information can be supplied via the 303
redirect without leading to ambiguous interpretation of such
information as being a representation of the resource (rather,
the redirection points to a different resource in the same way
as an external link from one resource to the other).


Cheers,

Roy T. Fielding                            <http://roy.gbiv.com/>
Chief Scientist, Day Software              <http://www.day.com/>