FWIW, I had a quick look at the current caching support in LOD datasets [1]
- not very encouraging, to be honest.
Cheers,
Michael
[1] http://webofdata.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/linked-open-data-http-caching/
--
Dr. Michael Hausenblas
LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
DERI - Digital
On Nov 23, 2009, at 9:02 PM, Herbert Van de Sompel wrote:
On Nov 23, 2009, at 4:59 PM, Erik Hetzner wrote:
At Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:40:33 -0500,
Mark Baker wrote:
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Peter Ansell ansell.pe...@gmail.com
wrote:
It should be up to resource creators to determine
Hi Nathan,
A good question, the way it gets answered as far as I can see depends
on what you're after.
Glad to see you're thinking linked data.
But people really do try to overthink it when it comes to ontologies,
in my opinion: ideally the best ontologies/vocabs will win -
- rubbish.
The
Herbert,
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Herbert Van de Sompel
hvds...@gmail.com wrote:
Just to let you know that our response to some issues re Memento raised here
and on Pete Johnston's blog post
(http://efoundations.typepad.com/efoundations/2009/11/memento-and-negotiating-on-time.html) is
Good man, I couldn't help thinking there was a paper in that...
2009/11/22 Herbert Van de Sompel hvds...@gmail.com:
hi all,
(thanks Chris, Richard, Danny)
In light of the current discussion, I would like to provide some
clarifications regarding Memento: Time Travel for the Web, ie the idea
2009/11/25 Michael Nelson m...@cs.odu.edu:
In practice, agent-driven CN is rarely done (I can only guess as to why). In
practice, you get either server-driven (as defined in RFC 2616) or
transparent CN (introduced in RFC 2616 (well, RFC 2068 actually), but really
defined in RFCs 2295 2296).
