- From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 16:51:25 -0500
- To: Leigh Dodds <leigh@ldodds.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
On Nov 1, 2005, at 3:04 PM, Leigh Dodds wrote: > > Hi, > > Couple of points of feedback on the spec examples: > > There's a minor problem with the response example in > "2.2.1.5 DESCRIBE with simple RDF dataset". I think the > Content-Type should be application/rdf+xml in line with [1] > rather than application/sparql-results+xml. That sounds right. Thanks. > Secondly, I think it would be useful if the fault examples > demonstrated the use of the malformed-query and > query-request-refused. The first example returns plain-text, > the second an HTML document. I'm not sure what you mean here. > For consistency, i.e. always returning XML, I think it would be > nicer if faults MUST return one of those elements and SHOULD include > a human-readable error message. I'm not sure what you mean here, either. Can you explain, or better, show me an HTTP response that looks like what you're suggesting? Cheers, Kendall -- It was a crime, I never told you 'bout the diamonds in your eyes.
Received on Thursday, 3 November 2005 21:51:37 UTC