- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 13:23:52 -0600
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 20:00 +0100, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > Dear RDF Data Access Working Group, > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050914/ has a > number of problems in the various examples that encourage inccorect > or suboptimal behavior; the draft should either be changed such that > the issues do not occur or such that it is clear why that is not > possible; in particular: > > * some violate http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#no-text-xml Which ones? How so? What would you suggest instead? > * some violate http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#no-charset Which ones? How so? > * some of the media types used in the document are not re- > gistered, e.g. text/rdf+n3 and application/dime. > > * the HTML document in 2.2.1.10 does not declare a character > encoding and is not a conforming HTML document > > * the text/plain document in 2.2.1.9 does not declare a > character encoding > > * in 2.2.1.5 it seems the type should be application/rdf+xml > > I also think using "my.example" in the Host: headers is suboptimal > e.g. due to <http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#Translations>. I > think a simple "example.org" or similar would be better here. > > regards, -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2005 19:25:16 UTC