- From: Rob Vesse <rav08r@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 12:44:10 +0000
- To: <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|b73e5887b0a1d83fb3e87d42b218401fn1ACiF06rav08r|ecs.soton.ac.uk|8d8d18b33d>
Hi I just noticed this part of the specification in Section 5 on Conformance: The returned RDF content MUST contain one and only one triple of the form: rdf:type sd:Service . This seems to be a somewhat heavy handed thing to mandate IMO. If I want to have a system that provides multiple endpoints for Update/Query etc why can't I define all the services of that system in a single service description? This allows me to both have a dedicated URI in my system for returning the service description in addition to returning it when an appropriate GET/OPTIONS request is received at the various service URIs This seems to unnecessarily make service discovery (which surely is part of the point of having service descriptions) harder than it needs to be. Provided each service has a different consuming clients can easily find the services they actually want even if multiple services are defined in the description so why mandate only 1 instance of sd:Service per Service Description document? Regards, Rob Vesse -- PhD Student IAM Group Bay 20, Room 4027, Building 32 Electronics & Computer Science University of Southampton
Received on Friday, 11 February 2011 12:44:45 UTC