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

Re: Proposed wording to clarify that POST behavior in GSHP is only for RDF graph content

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:34:26 +0000
Message-ID: <4EF080D2.6060407@epimorphics.com>
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org


On 20/12/11 09:46, Steve Harris wrote:
> On 20 Dec 2011, at 02:00, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>
>  snip 
>
>>         Note that this behavior is only sanctioned for HTTP POST
>>         requests where the request URI identifies only RDF graph
>>         content, with no special semantics or behavior.  Implementations
>>         of this protocol MAY interpret HTTP POST requests to other kinds
>>         of information resources in a manner that still provides a
>>         uniform method to cover the functions indicated in [RFC2616]
>>         (section 9.5 POST) but that is more appropriate for the kind of
>>         resource being targeted.
>
> That works for me.

+1

 > Another way of expressing it might be:
 >
 > This behaviour is only specified for resources which belong to an RDF
 > Graph Store. URIs identifying other RDF graph content outside of the
 > Graph Store may have other semantics or behaviour.
 >
 > Note: small "may" is deliberate.
 >
 > I'm fine with Sandro's text though.
 >
 > - Steve
 >

Sandro:
 >> The definition in this spec of "RDF graph content" is:

It depends whether having those characteristics are classifying as well 
as being definitional.

Not all things with 4 wheels are cars.

	Andy
Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2011 12:34:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:47 GMT