Fixes Antoine's #15

[larsgsvensson]

Updated examples two and three to use the 303 redirect pattern. This should fix number 15 in Antoine's concerns.
Visible in https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/larsgsvensson-antoine-%2315/conneg-by-ap/index.html#ex-2-using-a-link-header-to-point-to-a-list-of-available-profiles and https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/larsgsvensson-antoine-%2315/conneg-by-ap/index.html#ex-3-requesting-a-representation-conforming-to-a-specific-profile-using-http-headers

[aisaac]

Thanks @larsgsvensson I think it alleviate my concerns.
This said it triggers a new question: in example 2 couldn't the Link header with the alternative representation appear as soon as the first 303 response from the server?

[larsgsvensson]

@aisaac scripsit:

This said it triggers a new question: in example 2 couldn't the Link header with the alternative representation appear as soon as the first 303 response from the server?

Perhaps it could but I'm not sure how to relate the different representations to one another since the in the first request the Context IRI (in the sense of RFC 5988) denotes an abstract resource and not a representation. Do you have a suggestion?

[aisaac]

I don't have a suggestion, otherwise I would have created an issue ;-)
More seriously (and perhaps worryingly) this may touch on the discussion at #573, in the sense of what counts as representation and what count as abstract resource. (this was the meta-meta discussion at F2F4 on applying to publications of profiles the recipes of profile negotiation, e.g. the 'SHACL profile of the profile'). Maybe we should just wait and see until this sort of discussion has settled down.

[larsgsvensson]

@aisaac scripsit:

Maybe we should just wait and see until this sort of discussion has settled down.

+1. Let's see what feedback we get.