- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:50:13 +0100
- To: Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>
- Cc: Diego Berrueta Muņoz <diego.berrueta@fundacionctic.org>, John Goodwin <John.Goodwin@ordnancesurvey.co.uk>, Linking Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>
On 29 Apr 2009, at 10:17, Yves Raimond wrote: >> We're aware of the limitations of mod_rewrite to effectively and >> correctly >> implement content-negotiation, please see note at [1] and issue at >> [2]. Any >> suggestion on this would be greatly appreciated! > > I've played a bit with several ways of doing it. mod_negotiation seems > to be the most sensible solution. However, I did not find a way to > make it run with non-static files (e.g. DESCRIBE on a SPARQL > end-point). If not using that, then I think the only proper solution > left is to code the content negotiation in the actual web application > (that's what URISpace does, and I think that's what Pubby does). I reached exactly the same conclusion. I would recommend against the mod_rewrite hack because it is not a full implementation of content negotiation. mod_negotiation works great for static files, for everything else you should probably code your own solution. (And everyone who codes their own solution gets it wrong the first time ;-) In practice, content negotiation is quite an interoperability nightmare. One more point pro RDFa, I suppose. Best, Richard > > > Cheers! > y >
Received on Wednesday, 29 April 2009 12:50:55 UTC