- From: Ruben Verborgh <Ruben.Verborgh@UGent.be>
- Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 21:16:22 +0000
- To: "Svensson, Lars" <L.Svensson@dnb.de>
- CC: "kcoyle@kcoyle.net" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Hi Lars, > I have slight issues with "on top of that document's media type". To me profiles are kind of orthogonal to media types. A good example are ODRL profiles [1] that define semantic constraints for data structures. Those data structures can then be expressed in XML [2], JSON [3] or RDF (and the RDF serialised in any RDF serialisation). They are orthogonal indeed; what I wrote doesn't contradict this. "on top of that document's media type" means that all of the media types' rules apply (in particular the syntax). It does _not_ mean that a profile is coupled to a specific media type. > We must be careful not to look at profiles/application profiles/generic profiles (to me those are synonyms *in this context*) as something that is only relevant for data in RDF Certainly not. > The question if this is a real use case is important, though, since it also affects the profile negotiation deliverable: Do we need to have support for negotiation of multiple profiles or not? Yes, we most definitely should. Ruben
Received on Tuesday, 21 November 2017 21:16:49 UTC