W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > April 2010

httpRange-14 as normative reference (and something on ISSUE-49)

From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 23:40:55 +0200
To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Message-id: <201004232340.55889.kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
Hi all! Long time no see...

I've been relaying some comments on ISSUE-49 through Greg lately, but it 
isn't that easy to explain what I mean, and how the current HTTP bindings 
will confuse developers. I currently work with a number of developers who 
are antagonistic towards RDF, and I think is extremely important that they 
can appreciate that protocol, it is something very familiar to them that we 
are doing. 

Anyway, to explain that stuff properly, my plan is to write the code, it 
becomes easier to explain with actual code to point to, but I have very 
little time nowadays, so that may take some time before I get to.

Meanwhile, what I would hope you could discuss is whether the SPARQL WG 
should adopt httpRange-14 is a normative reference for the group's work. 

My opinion is that this decision should be based on the importance this 
finding has for the greater Semantic Web community, and design SPARQL based 
on the constraints it sets. httpRange-14 is now well established as a best 
practice for the Linked Data movement, it resolves a long standing issue 
we've taken a lot of fire from the Topic Maps community over, and finally, 
it is what the TAG thinks we should be doing. 

If later, it is found to have no influence on the group's work, then fine, 
but I think it has and I hope it can be settled by a very quick straw poll. 
+1 on it being adopted as a normative reference from me :-)

Cheers,

Kjetil
-- 
Kjetil Kjernsmo
kjetil@kjernsmo.net
http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/
Received on Friday, 23 April 2010 21:41:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 23 April 2010 21:41:54 GMT