W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-hydra@w3.org > July 2014

Re: Suggestion on URLs for triple pattern fragments

From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 17:16:45 +0200
Cc: "john.walker" <john.walker@semaku.com>, "public-hydra@w3.org" <public-hydra@w3.org>
Message-Id: <FB11C523-4E67-4D4F-99DA-CB8D9FE42543@ugent.be>
To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
> Also, if the API Documentation is retrieved using a format which supports prefixes, then the server is advertising the prefixes it understands. If the typical case is JSON-LD, then the context used with the documentation may be considered to be in effect.

True, and this holds by extension for _any_ response the server sends, not just documentation
(which typically has different namespaces than responses).

> Alternatively, we could use a mechanism like RDFa's initial context, and maintain a set of prefix definitions at a well-known location.

I'd avoid such hard-coded agreements though;
rather be explicit and list them (or point to that location in the response).
That minimizes the amount of out-of-band communication.
But it doesn't really matter if the stuff is optional anyway;
and it's better for caching if all clients use the same mechanism.

Received on Saturday, 26 July 2014 15:17:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:42 UTC