W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > January 2006

[OK?] Re: SPARQL Protocol: suboptimal examples

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:04:32 -0500
Message-Id: <BA982234-C460-4540-B65C-5A039D3722AC@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>


On Dec 14, 2005, at 2:37 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:

>
> * Dan Connolly wrote:
>>>   http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050914/ has a
>>> number of problems in the various examples that encourage inccorect
>>> or suboptimal behavior; the draft should either be changed such that
>>> the issues do not occur or such that it is clear why that is not
>>> possible; in particular:
>>>
>>>   * some violate http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#no-text-xml
>>
>> Which ones? How so? What would you suggest instead?
>
>   % GET http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050914/ |
>       grep -n -P "text/xml" -
>   1257:Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8
>   1275:Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8
>
> The correct type might be application/soap+xml.
>
>>>   * some violate http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#no-charset
>>
>> Which ones? How so?
>
>   % GET http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050914/ |
>       grep -n -P "xml.*charset" -
>   653:Content-Type: application/sparql-results+xml; charset=utf-8
>   704:Content-Type: application/sparql-results+xml; charset=utf-8
>   805:Content-Type: application/sparql-results+xml; charset=utf-8
>   833:Content-Type:  application/sparql-results+xml; charset=utf-8
>   873:Content-Type:  application/sparql-results+xml; charset=utf-8
>   960:Content-Type: application/sparql-results+xml; charset=utf-8
>   1028:Content-Type: application/sparql-results+xml; charset=utf-8
>   1192:Content-Type: application/sparql-results+xml; charset=utf-8
>   1257:Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8
>   1275:Content-Type: text/xml; charset=utf-8

I believe the latest editor's draft:

	http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/proto-wd/

addresses yr comments sufficiently. Can you let us know whether  
that's the case?

Cheers,
Kendall Clark
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2006 22:05:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:50 GMT