W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2004

RE: ACTION: elaborate on 4.4

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 18:37:02 +0100
Message-ID: <E864E95CB35C1C46B72FEA0626A2E80803615A6A@0-mail-br1.hpl.hp.com>
To: kendall@monkeyfist.com, "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>



-------- Original Message --------
> From: Kendall Clark <mailto:kendall@monkeyfist.com>
> Date: 18 June 2004 18:30
> 
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 06:24:31PM +0100, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> 
> > As do ours.  However, our own local preferecnes are enough on their
> > own to 
> 
> Presumbaly you left out a "not" here.

Err - yes - well spotted.

	Andy

> 
> > justify this WG getting involved.  Some of the issues are more bound
> > to registering MIME types and the time/work that takes.
> 
> I agree re: anyone group. But there seem to be many such groups.
> 
> I also agree about the problems with MIME type registration. I haven't
> looked to see how many of the other serialization formats have MIME
> tags or have registered for them.
> 
> Putting URIs into Accept: will probably get us yelled at,  as would a
> X-DAWG-Accept, presumably.
> 
> > If we can find a way to have an extensible "Accept:"-like scheme that
> > used URIs then that presumably would meet your need for the design
> > goal? 
> 
> Yes, that would do it, minimally.
> 
> Kendall
Received on Friday, 18 June 2004 13:37:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:19 GMT