- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:07:22 -0400
- To: Kendall Clark <kendall@clarkparsia.com>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Aug 11, 2009, at 10:46 AM, Kendall Clark wrote: > On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Gregory Williams<greg@evilfunhouse.com > > wrote: > >> Without conneg, would this prevent providing a query form at the >> service >> uri? > > Yes. > > I didn't realize people were doing that: *ick*; > > The problem with the proposed use of conneg is that, as spec'd, conneg > is not a way to get a representation of a different resource (query > form versus svc desc), it's a way to get a diff representation of the > *same* resource... so an HTML form or an RDF form... Or an HTML > version of the svc desc or an RDF version. But using conneg to return > an HTML form or a svc desc is an abuse of conneg. Well, ideally I'd like to see a description of the service when I load the service URI (bonus points for encoding this in RDFa), but is it an abuse of conneg to *also* provide a query FORM on the HTML version? .greg
Received on Tuesday, 11 August 2009 15:07:59 UTC