- From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 09:10:58 -0500
- To: andy.seaborne@hp.com
- Cc: dawg mailing list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Jan 3, 2006, at 7:10 AM, Seaborne, Andy wrote: > Can we use the current <link> mechanism here? It points to some > metadata for the results. I suppose so. > I don't see a need for another element as such. Your example > below shows that the boundary between warning and "additional > information" is not clear-cut. While that's true, I don't think that suggests using <link> or some other element/attribute. >> I also prefer to raise this issue now, perhaps discuss it, then >> postpone it till later. > > There remains the matter of warning for RDF/XML results over plain > HTTP. Short of putting new constructs into the results format, I don't think this is very easy or practical. Could use multipart responses, but I think that's a mistake, and I'm not entirely sure how to do that in WSDL anyway. > I don't see where addition information can be inserted. > Postponing would be acceptable. I don't really either. And, as I said, I'm fine with postponing this issue too. Cheers, Kendall
Received on Tuesday, 3 January 2006 14:11:03 UTC