Re: [HTTP-in-RDF] Revised simplified approach (2)

Welcome back

Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb:
> Thanks for reworking this, it looks good to me. One question though, the 
> http:Message class reminds me very much of the RFC 822 work that we have 
> dropped a while ago. I'm not arguing to revive this work (or namespace)

Really? ;-)

> but do you think we could clean it up to become an extension point?
> 
> For example if we move http:body up into the http:Message and remodel 
> http:httpVersion (not sure how though) then the http:Message resembles 
> pretty much an rfc822:Message (and anyone who needs it can extend it).

You mean something like:

foo:Message
|- 0..1 foo:headers
|- 1 foo:body

http:Message extends foo:Message
|- 1 http:httpVersion
|- 0..1 dc:date

foo:headers ((Collection of) foo:MessageHeader)
foo:body ((rdf:Alt of) foo:Content)

with Content (with subclasses), MessageHeader, HeaderName, 
HeaderElement, Param and their properties moving to the foo namespace?

-- 
Johannes Koch
BIKA Web Compliance Center - Fraunhofer FIT
Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany
Phone: +49-2241-142628    Fax: +49-2241-142065