W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > August 2011

Re: JSON Emergency Brake

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 17:35:26 +0100
Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <E4F3E471-3537-4D8E-A9E5-D6725F15DD08@cyganiak.de>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
On 26 Aug 2011, at 16:30, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 8/26/11 6:35 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
>> As I said, using the Link HTTP header brings no advantage over embedding the link in the representation. The processing of rel="@context" is specific to JSON-LD anyways, so why not include the link in the JSON-LD payload.
> 
> Why not in both places as we do ?

The *only* reason for adding this feature that I've seen expressed so far is:

“Why not?”

And the generic answer is: because adding a feature always has a cost, and every feature must carry its weight. Adding features just because we can is no way to design a system.

Best,
Richard


> Then you let the developers choose. We already do this in the pages we serve up.
> 
> Just lookup a DBpedia URI to see what I mean, assuming you haven't done so already. Note, I don't mean rel="@context", I am  referring to mirroring "Link:" response headers with <link/> entries in <head/> of HTML resources.
> 
> -- 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Kingsley Idehen	
> President&  CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 27 August 2011 16:37:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:44 GMT