W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: Media type for fed query?

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 14:00:41 +0100
Cc: Carlos Buil Aranda <cbuil@fi.upm.es>
Message-Id: <6340A7FD-35DD-402A-963C-0234889DBEB7@deri.org>
To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I added this as a proposal to the Last call page:

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/To_Last_Call#WG_issues_.26_needed_decisions_5

 PROPOSED: Remove Section http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/fed/service#mediaType from Federated Query document.

Axel


On 13 May 2011, at 15:35, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:

> Similar is different from the same.
> 
> The question is whether the fact that this is an optional extension to
> the query language means that it deserves or needs its own MIME type.
> 
> My instinct would be "no".
> 
> Lee
> 
> On 5/13/2011 10:22 AM, Carlos Buil Aranda wrote:
> > I don't think it is necessary since this is part of the main query
> > document and it can't exist alone, so the media type should be similar
> > to the one in the main query document. Actually they are quite similar.
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> > 2011/5/13 Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net <mailto:lee@thefigtrees.net>>
> >
> >     I realize now that EricP had put in the MIME type section in fed
> >     query as an example, but suggested that we probably DON'T want a
> >     separate media type for it:
> >
> >     """
> >     It's probably not worth the cost of a differential media type. If it
> >     were, that registration would probably look like:
> >     """
> >
> >     Do you think that we should register a media type for federated query?
> >
> >     If not, we'll just remove that section from the document.
> >
> >     Lee
> >
> >
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 17 May 2011 13:01:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:46 GMT