- From: Vasiliy Faronov <vfaronov@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 12:17:56 +0300
- To: Phil Archer <phil.archer@talis.com>
- Cc: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Peter DeVries <pete.devries@gmail.com>, public-lod@w3.org
On Пнд, 2011-01-10 at 08:55 +0000, Phil Archer wrote: > However... a property should not imply any content type AFAIAC. That's > the job of the HTTP Headers. If software de-references an rdfs:seeAlso > object and only expects RDF then it should have a suitable accept > header. if the server can't respond with that content type, there are > codes to handle that. RDF often comes in the form of RDFa, which doesn't have a separate media type from that of the host language. There are also custom provisions for RDF in OpenDocument and PDF as far as I understand. But I agree that using a property to indicate non-RDF content might be conflating things, as format is orthogonal to the role of the relation. Maybe something like this could work: </foo> rdfs:seeAlso </bar> . </bar> a see:HumanReadableOnlyDescription ; dcterms:format <http://example.net/text/html> . -- Vasiliy Faronov
Received on Monday, 10 January 2011 09:18:28 UTC