W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > May 2002

Re: [ij@w3.org: Proposed TAG Finding: Internet Media Type registration, consistency of use] (fwd)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 21 May 2002 21:42:18 -0500
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, w3c-semweb-cg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1022035339.10964.180.camel@dirk>
On Tue, 2002-05-21 at 20:07, Dan Brickley wrote:
> 
> Excuse the crosspost (RDFCore WG and SemWeb Coordination Group). Please
> direct followups to one of these lists.
> 
> 
> The TAG are making decisions about media type registration that affect W3C
> WGs who are defining 'languages'. We might want to consider whether RDF
> (RDFCore, RDFS, WebOnt, ...) is, for these purposes, one or several
> 'languages'. We might also want to consider whether each new RDF Schema
> that a (working) group defines is a 'language' in the sense used in this
> TAG proposal. My gut reaction is that registering an Internet Media Type
> for each new RDF Schema would be counter-productive. RDF is designed for
> fine-grained mixing; Media Types are useful for course-grained dispatching
> based on content type. But I need to think about this some more...
> 
> There isn't much time till their suggested closure date of May 28th. I'm
> not sure what the next sensible step is? Brian, EricM, DanC?

Er... I don't see any change to the sensible next step, which
is to address the issue...

http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#mime-types-for-rdf-docs

in fact, I see the WG has addressed it.

WebOnt should consider a similar issue; whether a
media type per RDF vocab is constructive or not should
be decided on the merits: what do you expect mail
user agents and web user agents to do when they
get stuff labelled with this media type? If the one for
RDF cuts it for WebOnt, very well. If not, another one
is needed.

The TAG finding informs, but doesn't decide these issues.
It can be summarized thus: RTFM.

Oh; I suppose it has editorial/process/coordination
impact: the media type
for RDF has to be part of a W3C REC-track spec,
as well as becoming an IETF RFC. So RDF core has to choose
which WD to stick the media type stuff into...
or make a new WD.

I'd suggest appending it to the syntax spec.

Appending it to the primer seems OK too.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 21 May 2002 22:42:15 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:48:15 EDT