- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:32:49 -0500
- To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
- Cc: timbl@w3.org, public-cwm-talk@w3.org
Hi. Nice to see
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050114
out and about :)
Just one brief and boring comment now while I remember:
"text/n3" should probably be "application/rdf+n3"
or "application/n3". Googling for these, it seems both
are in various codebases. Perhaps having a conneg-happy
protocol spec out there will motivate some concensus
(and a media type registration) in the N3 scene? CC:'ing timbl...
(text/n3 is worse due to UTF-8 vs ASCII issues). Ah,
Tim says "text/rdf+n3" is also in use. Hmm. I'm going to hit
"send" on this mail anyways, to flag the issue!
cheers,
Dan
ps. typos in 2.2:
"Accept-Chareset" -> "Accept-Charset"
"prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/%gt; ."
... s/%gt/>/ I think
also suggest "Host: my.example"
-> "Host: my.example.org"
although http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2606.txt
allows .example as a fictional TLD
Received on Sunday, 16 January 2005 20:33:00 UTC