- From: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:46:42 -0500
- To: "Wilde, Erik" <Erik.Wilde@emc.com>, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, Linked Data Platform WG <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
On 11/11/2013 01:43 PM, Wilde, Erik wrote: > 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. I agree. Alexandre. > > cheers, > > dret. > >
Received on Monday, 11 November 2013 18:47:21 UTC