W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: RC-2 resolution

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:11:46 +0100
Message-ID: <506C0152.3060709@epimorphics.com>
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org


On 02/10/12 21:24, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> Note the following Internet Draft:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-problem-01
>
> Indicating Details of Problems to Machines in HTTP
> draft-nottingham-http-problem-01
>    Expires: March 17, 2013
>
> i.e. this area, in general, is emerging.
>
>      Andy
>
>
> On 02/10/12 21:21, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
>> I talked to Greg, and we looked more closely at Richard's latest
>> suggestion. In it, he includes a "minimal option":
>>
>> "[T]he minimal option would be to encourage text/plain error messages
>> by providing*only*  text/plain examples (currently there's one for
>> text/plain and one for HTML)"
>>
>>
>> Given the lack of experience and consensus, Greg and I feel that
>> Richard's suggestion here is acceptable, and we plan to modify the
>> protocol editor's draft accordingly. Please speak up if you're not
>> happy with this resolution.
>>
>> Also, please take a look at this draft response which I'd propose we
>> send to Richard:

Looks good to me.

Given the I-D noted, and our recent brief survey, it's clear to me this 
area is not one where there is clear deployed approach.  I don't think a 
SPARQL specific one is a good idea.  So "place no impediments" to 
emerging approaches is the best principle.  The proposed resolution is 
the best way forward.

	Andy


>>
>> """
>> After several more discussions, it remains clear that we still have a
>> lack of consensus on this topic and given our group's dwindling
>> timeline, we have no further time to devote to this issue. To that
>> end, we've removed the examples that encouraged using the HTTP status
>> message. We've also adopted your "minimal option", and adjusted the
>> error examples to all use text/plain responses.
>>
>> Please let us know if this satisfactorily addresses your comments.
>>
>> thanks,
>> Lee
>> On behalf of the SPARQL WG
>> """
>>
>>
>> Lee
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2012 09:12:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:49 GMT