- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 12:18:57 -0500
- To: "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hp.com>
- Cc: public-sw-meaning@w3.org
Hey Stuart, On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 04:59:35PM -0000, Williams, Stuart wrote: > Hello Mark, > > > Fair enough. What I meant to say was that from a message > > sender POV, describing their RDF/XML document as text/plain > > is one way to avoid communicating the graph. If any > > recipient does extract the graph, then that's "sniffing", and > > "bad" per the TAG finding on authoritative metadata[1]. > > Hmmm... that's not quite what the finding says... last para section 3.2 [2] > > "The Internet media type asserts "this is X", not "process this as follows." > Representation metadata does not constrain the receiving agent to process > the representation data in one particular way." > > "this is X" meaning this is an instance of media-type X. Sorry, I misspoke. Extracting the graph isn't the bad part. What's bad is believing that the recipient was trying to communicate the graph. Mark.
Received on Thursday, 25 March 2004 12:41:35 UTC