W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > April 2005

Re: SemWeb Non-Starter -- Distributed URI Discovery

From: Andy Powell <a.powell@ukoln.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:38:48 +0100 (GMT Standard Time)
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.61.0504111030220.224@ulpc-ap>

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005, Patrick Stickler wrote:

> E.g. what if your sw agent prefers N3, or XTM, or TriX, and all
> are supported by the given server. If you've used conneg to get
> the description itself, what do you use to ask the server for
> a prefered encoding?

You use a MIME type that is specific enough to ask for the encoding of the 
description that you want.

> In short, using conneg to provide URIQA-like functionality is
> a misuse of conneg. It's a hack. And it precludes using conneg
> for what it was intended for.

I'm still confused... supposing that for a particular resource my server 
supports the following representations


You seem to be saying that it's OK to use conneg to ask for the first 
two of these... but it's not OK to use it to request the other two?

Supposing also that my server supports a 'complex object' representation - 
for example, a METS package that contains both the HTML and the RDF+XML 

Am I allowed to use conneg to request that representation or not?

Distributed Systems, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK
tel: +44 1225 383933 msn: ukolnlisap@hotmail.com
Resource Discovery Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/
Received on Monday, 11 April 2005 09:50:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:55 UTC