- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 17:35:26 +0100
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 26 Aug 2011, at 16:30, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 8/26/11 6:35 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote: >> As I said, using the Link HTTP header brings no advantage over embedding the link in the representation. The processing of rel="@context" is specific to JSON-LD anyways, so why not include the link in the JSON-LD payload. > > Why not in both places as we do ? The *only* reason for adding this feature that I've seen expressed so far is: “Why not?” And the generic answer is: because adding a feature always has a cost, and every feature must carry its weight. Adding features just because we can is no way to design a system. Best, Richard > Then you let the developers choose. We already do this in the pages we serve up. > > Just lookup a DBpedia URI to see what I mean, assuming you haven't done so already. Note, I don't mean rel="@context", I am referring to mirroring "Link:" response headers with <link/> entries in <head/> of HTML resources. > > -- > > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen > President& CEO > OpenLink Software > Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen > > > > > >
Received on Saturday, 27 August 2011 16:37:05 UTC