RE: [VM] 22 November Telecon: technical issues.

Hey Dan,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Brickley [mailto:danbri@w3.org]
> Sent: 22 November 2005 18:24
> To: Miles, AJ (Alistair)
> Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [VM] 22 November Telecon: technical issues.
> 
> 
> * Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk> [2005-11-22 18:07-0000]
> > 
> > Some technical issues from today's VM TF telecon, relating 
> specifically to:
> > 
> > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2005-11-18/
> > 
> >  - Default content type? The 'requirements' section 
> currently says that serving RDF/XML content should be the 
> default, where content-negotiation is possible. Danbri would 
> like a config that allows the administrator to decide which 
> is the default.
> 
> I plan to serve HTML by default until someone persuades me otherwise.
> 
> Hmm I guess all browsers send 'accept: text/html' don't they?
> 
> I want to ensure that http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/ remains reliably 
> browsable...

Afaik all browsers send an 'Accept:' header in their HTTP GET requests.

Afaik no RDF clients or client libraries (e.g. Jena) send an 'Accept:' header in their HTTP GET requests.

Setting 'application/rdf+xml' as the 'default' means returning RDF/XML content in the response, when no 'Accept:' header has been specified in the request. This configuration means we are backwards-compatible with current RDF toolkits, although we should probably still recommend that RDF toolkits include an 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' header with GET requests.  

Because all (?) browsers already include an appropriate 'Accept:' header in HTTP GET requests, the URIs should still remain 'reliably browsable'.

As an aside, I think there should be a registered MIME type at least for Turtle, and probably also for Notation 3, N-Triples, (TriG and TriX?).

Cheers,

Al.


> 
> Dan
>

Received on Wednesday, 7 December 2005 17:06:13 UTC