W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2009

Re: Uniform access to metadata: XRD use case.

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 05:59:09 +0100
To: <wangxiao@musc.edu>
CC: <eran@hueniverse.com>, <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, <jar@creativecommons.org>, <connolly@w3.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C5CBEE3D.DFBA%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>

On 2009-02-25 19:05, "ext Xiaoshu Wang" <wangxiao@musc.edu> wrote:

> ...  You need to define
> precisely to say what is "mis-use" and what is not.  Making blank
> statement is not helpful.

> Again, show a use case to demonstrate how optimal MGET is over Conneg.
> Repeating something doesn't make something true.

> ... What I am saying is that then Conneg for RDF-type does the
> same thing as MGET.  I don't need MGET to get RDF.

> ... whatever MGET do can be done in
> CN.  Then, please, make some concrete argument to justify your claim and
> show (1) something that MGET can do but CN cannot do. or (2) if both can
> do, why MGET is good or CN is bad in practice.

I have already responded to all of these points (some of them several
times). Please take the time to read my posts, and if you have any further
questions about anything I have said, please ask me in a private email.


Received on Thursday, 26 February 2009 04:57:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:01 UTC