W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > March 2004

Re: RDF as application/rdf+xml

From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:22:23 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040323141647.02eb7d98@127.0.0.1>
To: Dirk-Willem van Gulik <dirkx@asemantics.com>
Cc: RDF interest group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

At 14:35 23/03/04 +0100, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:

>On Mar 23, 2004, at 2:14 PM, Graham Klyne wrote:
>
>>
>>It turns out that getting Apache to serve application/rdf+xml is dead 
>>easy.  Simply adding the following line to one's .htaccess file does the 
>>trick for *.rdf files.
>>
>>   AddType application/rdf+xml .rdf
>
>You probably want to add it to your conf/mime.types as
>
>                 application/rdf+xml     rdf RDF Rdf
>
>or add the above line to httpd.conf as ".htaccess" files have
>rather large performance/security downsides.

Hi Dirk-Willem,

(I don't run my own Apache server, so I only get to use the .htaccess 
files.  When the MIME type is registered, I could talk to my ISP.)

>While on the subject - was
>
>         draft-swartz-rdfcore-rdfxml-mediatype-01
>
>ever turned into an RFC ? If that is the case them I am perfectly
>happy to add the above to the Apache standard distributions.

It's "in the mill".  (Actually, a question from that process about the 
extent to which application/rdf+xml is actually used was partly responsible 
for prompting this thread.)

>Right now the last I can find is a 'Should Not' in RFC3023:
[...]

Yes, I noticed that too.

>Which makes it a bit hard for me to argue that we should put this
>mime type in the core apache distributions.

Yes, of course.

#g


------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Tuesday, 23 March 2004 09:22:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 18 February 2014 13:20:07 UTC