Mark Nottingham has posted a nice status report on the ongoing effort to revise HTTP 1.1 and specify HTTP 2.0. In the post Mark highlights a list of changes from RFC2616. This ought to be required reading for anyone doing web application development, particularly if you’re building APIs.
I thought it might be useful to skim through the list of changes and highlight those that are particularly relevant to Linked Data and Linked Data applications. Here are the things that caught my eye. I’ve included references to the relevant documents.
- In Messaging, there is no longer a limit of 2 connections per server. Linked Data applications typically make multiple parallel requests to fetch Linked Data, so having more connections available could help improve performance on the client. In practice browsers have been ignoring this limit for a while, so you’re probably already seeing the benefit.
- In Semantics, there is a terminology change with respect to content negotiation: we ought to be talking about proactive (client-side) and reactive (server-side) negotiation
- In Semantics, a 201 Created response can now indicate that multiple resources have been created. Useful to help indicate if a POST of some data has resulted in the creation of several different RDF resources.
- In Semantics, a 303 response is now cacheable. This addresses one performance issue associated with redirects.
- In Semantics, the default charset for text media types is now whatever the media type says it is, and not ISO-8859-1. This should allow some caveats in the Turtle specification to be removed. UTF-8 can be documented as the default.
So, no really major impacts as far as I can see, but the cacheability of 303 should bring some benefits.
If you think I’ve missed anything important, then leave a comment.
One thought on “HTTP 1.1 Changes Relevant to Linked Data”
Thanks Leigh! One of these will have me immediately tweaking code. Had a situation where a POST to an endpoint was creating a resource elsewhere, and it wasn’t clear from the earlier spec what would be appropriate (think I just used No Content). 201 it is then.
Oh yeah, and Happy New Year!
Comments are closed.