W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-wg@w3.org > November 2006

Re: toward tests for spec#issue-mt-ns

From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 13:27:51 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>

At 11:56 AM 11/1/2006 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
> > As a data point, I asked cwm what it thinks, and it does
> > not see any triples there because it does not specify
> > application/xml among the MIME types that it's willing
> > to accept when it GETs the representation, and www.w3.org
> > chooses to give a 406 error (note that per the HTTP
> > spec, it MAY give a 200 OK response with application/xml
> > in this case).


>i.e. they answer "yes" to today's poll.

Glad to hear that they agree.

First, who is cwm?

Secondly, I followed my nose and following is what I came up with.
Please tell me if I lost track of my nose along the way.

Examining the sample XML document, I discover a namespace which I inspect.
It asserts an RDF namespace -- http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
So I follow that eventually to 
which is entitled: RDF/XML Syntax Specification. So far, so good.

So far, I have an XML document and I have discovered that the RDF namespace 
been asserted in that document's namespace document. What does the RDF/XML 
Spec say that can help me decide whether to grok triples. Well it says:

         The Internet Media Type / MIME type for RDF is "application/rdf+xml"

I read that as asserting authority over the RDF namespace and saying that the
mime type is application/rdf+xml. That is, I don't see it saying that if 
the document's
declared mime type is other than application/rdf+xml then there is an 
error. Rather
that the namespace is claiming that whatever else you may believe, RDF/XML has
a mime-type of application/rdf+xml.

Received on Wednesday, 1 November 2006 18:33:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:39:09 UTC