W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > August 2009

"suboptions" of Option 7

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:26:55 +0100
Message-ID: <4A8AC83F.4080702@deri.org>
To: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
As a lightweight version of Option 7, which reuires content negotiation 
to receive the RDF service description on the endpoint URL, there 
occurred some sub-options in the discussion today, which I try to 
summarize below:

Option 7' (RDFa): If HTML is served instead of RDF at the endpoint 
location (e.g. a query form), then allow it to have implicitly the RDF 
of the service description in the form of RDFa

  con: RDFa needs to be parsed/extracted to get RDF out

Option 7'' (LINK element)
If HTML is served instead of RDF at the endpoint location (e.g. a query 
form), then allow it to have a <link> element in the HTML head pointing 
to the service description

  con: needs 2 requests (which originally was the strongest argument 
against Option 1)

Option 7''': either of Option 7'/7'' in combination with the pure Option 
7, i.e. if content type HTML is requested, require anyways Option 7' or 
7'', when content type RDF is requested, serve description directly.

Axel



-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 15:27:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 18 August 2009 15:27:36 GMT