- From: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 17:50:07 -0500
- To: "Wilde, Erik" <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>
- Cc: Linked Data Platform Working Group <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 22:50:35 UTC
On Jan 31, 2013, at 13:41, "Wilde, Erik" <Erik.Wilde@emc.com> wrote: > hello david. > > On 2013-01-31 19:27 , "David Wood" <david@3roundstones.com> wrote: >> On Jan 31, 2013, at 13:18, "Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group >> Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: >>> ldp-ISSUE-48 (profiles): Profile mechanism is Needed [Linked Data >>> Platform core] >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/48 >>> >>> Could this problem be addressed by simply requiring that LDP servers >>> either advertise a list of vocabularies they support or a statement that >>> any vocabularies are acceptable? > > could you say in a little more detail what you have in mind? advertising > vocabularies on the web is done by advertising media types, which is what > the original issue was about. if you refer to an RDF-specific mechanism of > advertising vocabularies, then that may be unnecessary because the > visibility issue is mostly about making LDP visible and discoverable on > the web level, and not on the RDF level. I had in mind a VoID extension, but there are other ways. Regards, Dave -- http://about.me/david_wood > > cheers, > > dret. > >
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 22:50:35 UTC