W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > May 2012

Named Graphs and Content Negotiation

From: Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 17:49:31 -0400
Message-ID: <CADUi7O7CCu7hkt2JqY6qjJrUnqrMi3ZVKAgJ-nC2RGqK42c_ag@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-openannotation@w3.org
OK, I concede that  [1] seems to slightly discourage the use of Named
Graphs, though conceding their utility. Hence, my concern may not be
of great impact.  But I am slightly concerned by the tex in the OAX

"This form MUST ONLY be returned when dereferencing an Annotation's
URI if the client explicitly requests a Named Graph serialization via
Content Negotiation. This restriction is to ensure interoperability
with clients that can not parse the Named Graph serialization, and
hence would be unable to parse the Annotation graph at all."

Content Negotiation is defined by the http protocol, and the first
sentence seems to assume that Named Graphs must have http URIs. (Maybe
I'm wrong.  Maybe other dereferencable URI schemes can support http
Content Negotiation???).   OA has plenty of advice or requirements
about resources with http URIs, but this seems to be the only facility
in OA that can't be used except with http URIs.


[1] http://www.openannotation.org/spec/extension/#NamedGraph

Robert A. Morris

Emeritus Professor  of Computer Science
100 Morrissey Blvd
Boston, MA 02125-3390

IT Staff
Filtered Push Project
Harvard University Herbaria
Harvard University

email: morris.bob@gmail.com
web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/
web: http://etaxonomy.org/mw/FilteredPush
The content of this communication is made entirely on my
own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express
official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or
Harvard University.
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2012 21:50:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:22:00 UTC