W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sweo-ig@w3.org > March 2008

Re: proposed change to best-practices recipes for publihsing rdf vocabs - will not change

From: Leo Sauermann <leo.sauermann@dfki.de>
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:51:38 +0200
Message-ID: <47EFD32A.7070209@dfki.de>
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
CC: "'public-swbp-wg@w3.org'" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>, W3C SWEO IG <public-sweo-ig@w3.org>
Hi Harry,

answering to you and SWEO, this special issue does not require Alistair 
or SWBP involvement.... but forwarded to them for documentation

I checked the document, there are many hints how to implement conneg 
already,
Due to the already-revirewed state of the document, I would not change 
it now based on the recommendation to add more links about conneg...
see below.

It was Harry Halpin who said at the right time 29.03.2008 20:30 the 
following words:
> Leo Sauermann wrote:
>   
>> Hi Alistair,
>>
>> Harry Halpin has reviewed cool-uris-for the semantic web and has
>> proposed to merge the BestPractices you edit together with cool-uris.
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sweo-ig/2008Mar/0097.html
>>     
> Well, to be precise it seems that "Cool URIs" as stands currently,
> except with the slight divergence is Sec 4.7, is a good explanatory
> document, but it's "conceptual" and very high level. It would be great
> if it could aligned with Best Practices, because after reading it the
> average hacker on the street may get excited and actually want to deploy
> 303 redirection, which is a bit of a black art to most people. That
> black art is *not* explained in "Cool URIs" but explained in Best
> Recipes. So clearly, so sort of large pointer to "If you actually want
> to implement any of this, please see the Best Practices Document" needs
> to be in Cool URIs,

We already refer to the Best Practices document in the section 4.7:
"4.7. Implementing Content Negotiation
The W3C's Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment Working Group has 
published a document that describes how to implement the solutions 
presented here on the Apache Web server. The Best Practice Recipes for 
Publishing RDF Vocabularies [Recipes] mostly discuss the publication of 
RDF vocabularies, but the ideas can also be applied to other kinds of 
small RDF datasets that are published from static files. "

the second-last paragrpah of 4.7 gives a link to the actual Apache 
documentation about content negotiation:
"To determine the best variant for a particular client, Apache 
multiplies the client's q value for HTML with the configured qs value 
for HTML; and the same for RDF. The variant with the higher number wins. 
Apache's documentation has a section with a detailed description of its 
content negotiation algorithm [ApCN]. HTTP's Accept header is described 
in detail in section 14.1 of the HTTP specification [HTTP-SPEC]. "

I would say that is enough,
4.7 is about content negotiation,
it says to look in the recipes, it refers to apache.
google to the rescue if more information is needed :-)

I aknowledge that we could point more into the recipes, but the reader 
should be clever enough to spot the right part in the recipes.

best
Leo




-- 
____________________________________________________
DI Leo Sauermann       http://www.dfki.de/~sauermann 

Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer 
Kuenstliche Intelligenz DFKI GmbH
Trippstadter Strasse 122
P.O. Box 2080           Fon:   +49 631 20575-116
D-67663 Kaiserslautern  Fax:   +49 631 20575-102
Germany                 Mail:  leo.sauermann@dfki.de

Geschaeftsfuehrung:
Prof.Dr.Dr.h.c.mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
Dr. Walter Olthoff
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
____________________________________________________
Received on Sunday, 30 March 2008 17:52:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 30 March 2008 17:52:26 GMT