W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > December 2011

RE: broken turtle

From: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:53:15 -0800
Message-ID: <SNT143-W28271B51A4B62B9747F79592AA0@phx.gbl>
To: "public-xg-webid@w3.org" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>

@prefix peter: <https://rapstr1.blob.core.windows.net/ods/user.ttl#> .
if I use the explicit https scheme for the prefix of the subject, and the SAN URI has an http URI, I assume there will no match. Since the RDfa example is relative, perhaps consider make the turtle sample relative. Just do them the same way, that is, so the SAN URI controls the http/https issues in the namespace. i think this means make the subjkect's namespace the default (and move cert namespace to an explicit tag). but what do I know...  From: home_pw@msn.com
To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:31:00 -0800
Subject: broken turtle











Since Ive had two sites able to read a blog post with an bit of annotated HTML act as a webid profile (tied to a cert), I professionalized a bit.
 
I built a turtle file, per the spec, and published it on a restful file server (azure blob service). I configured things so the mime type is application/turtle.
 
Whats wrong? I tried it on FOAFSSL.ORG, which produced information document in this report: http://wp.me/p1fcz8-1Kf

 
 
 
 		 	   		   		 	   		  
Received on Thursday, 22 December 2011 22:53:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 22 December 2011 22:53:47 GMT