Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
from http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/alternatives-discovery.html
>
[...]
While I'm not always a fan of TAG findings, I think this one makes a TON
of sense.
I'll agree with that, but where do they talk about having canonical URIs
for each specific representation?
I understand well the need for representation-independant URIs, but I don't
see the use of a generic identifier for e.g. P12345 in FASTA format: If you
really wanted to make any statements about that representation, you'd
better attach them to the actual URL, given that there are many ways to
represent P12345 in FASTA format (every server seems to do so differently).
Are there any standards/tools that know what to do with 303 responses?
Some. An influential tool by a certain Tim Berners Lee called Tabulator
does. I've understood that it is considered a courtesy to respond 303 to
things which are not gettable as such, and to provide information about
related information, in this case the specifically formatted versions.
I don't feel comfortable with showing a minimalistic page with some weird
acronyms when someone enters e.g. http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/P12345.
Ideally there would be a standard way for a client to request "what
representations are available". Perhaps I could return 303 if no Accept
header is set, don't know if that is a good idea?
