- From: Wilde, Erik <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:43:14 -0500
- To: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>, "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>, Linked Data Platform WG <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
hello alexandre. On 2013-11-11, 10:34 , "Alexandre Bertails" <bertails@w3.org> wrote: >+1. A server would be lying to a client if it returns [[ Content-Type: >text/turtle ]] while adding some extra constraints like paging. Paging >is not a conservative extension for already defined RDF resources and >this cannot simply be fixed with a Link header. it wouldn't hurt if the server serves such a constrained RDF serialization, since it is in fact a valid text/turtle document. however, clients cannot depend on this, so it should not be part of LDP at all. if it is part of LDP, then LDP server implementations cannot use generic turtle serializers anymore, and need a specific serialization component just to meet that constraint. that's equivalent to the "yes, it kind of looks like XML, but you cannot do these three things, so it actually isn't XML" approach i was mentioning earlier. that's proven to create substantial unhappiness, because it effectively disallows the use of off-the-shelf components for standard tasks such as serialization. cheers, dret.
Received on Monday, 11 November 2013 18:43:56 UTC