- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 15:53:23 +0100
- To: Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Ian, On 1 Oct 2010, at 15:22, Ian Davis wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Richard Cyganiak > <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote: >> My proposal would be: >> >> 1. To state in the HTTP binding that clients SHOULD use the XML fault >> message format when reporting faults. > > I disagree with this position. A principle I adhere to is that errors > are debugged by humans not machines I agree with this principle. But a human cannot debug the error message if it isn't passed through all layers of the system up to the user. > so therefore I favour plain text > error messages. Plain text is certainly one step forward from an HTML error page containing a Java stack trace. > Underconstraining the spec in this case is a better option. Underconstraining means that some implementations will continue to use HTML error pages, which do not allow reliable reporting of error messages to a human if the human uses a SPARQL library or SPARQL client to interact with the endpoint. Hence, the position you advocate makes it less likely that a user will actually see an error message. Richard > > Ian
Received on Friday, 1 October 2010 14:54:07 UTC