- From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 11:59:04 +0100
- To: chris@codex.net.au
- Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Linking Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAK4ZFVGRnknUtz2rgN8GwRXNJ5WRCtDNpuO6ejwsYm1oG-+kdA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Chris 2013/2/6 Chris Beer <chris@codex.net.au> > Bernard, Ivan > > (At last! Something I can speak semi-authoritatively on ;P ) > > @ Bernard - no - there is no reason to go back if you do not want to, and > every reason to serve both formats plus more. > More ??? Well, I was heading the other way round actually for sake of simplicity. As said before I've used RDF/XML for years despite all criticisms, and was happy with it (the devil you know etc). What I understand of the current trend is that to ease RDF and linked data adoption we should promote now this simple, both human-readable and machine-friendly publication syntax (Turtle). And having tried it for a while, I now begin to be convinced enough as to adopt it in publication - thanks to continuing promotion by Kingsley among others :) And now you tell me I should still bother to provide n other formats, RDF/XML and more. I thought I was about to simplify my life, you tell me I have to make the simple things, *plus* the more complex ones as before. Hmm. > Your comment about UA's complaining about a content negotiation issue is > key to what you're trying to do here. I'd like to provide some clear > guidance or suggestions back, but first, if possible, can you please post > the http request headers for the four (and any others you have) user > agents you've used to attempt to request your rdf+xml files and which have > either choked or accepted the .ttl file. I can try to find out how do that, although remind you I can discuss languages, ontologies, syntax and semantics of data at will, but when it comes to protocols and Webby things it's not really my story, so I don't promise anything. AND : there's NO rdf+xml file in that case, only text/turtle. And that's exactly the point : can/should one do that, or not? Do I have to pass the message to adopters : publish RDF in Turtle, it's a very cool an simple syntax (oh but BTW don't forget to add HTML documentation, and also RDF/XML, and JSON, and multilingual variants, and proper content negotiation ...) ... well, OK, let's be clear about it if we have to do that ... but it looks like a non-starter for adoption of Turtle. > Extra points if you can also post > the server's response headers. > Same remark as above. Thanks for your time Bernard -- *Bernard Vatant * Vocabularies & Data Engineering Tel : + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59 Skype : bernard.vatant Blog : the wheel and the hub <http://blog.hubjects.com/> -------------------------------------------------------- *Mondeca** ** * 3 cité Nollez 75018 Paris, France www.mondeca.com Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews <http://twitter.com/#%21/mondecanews> ---------------------------------------------------------- Meet us at Documation <http://www.documation.fr/> in Paris, March 20-21
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2013 10:59:52 UTC