Re: parse() and media types

There are no strict rules as for what can be added to that list; it is really meant to uniquely identify 'formats' that are needed and for which the media type or such would not work. So yes, I can add microdata and microformats to it if the need arises.

Ivan



On Oct 24, 2010, at 03:21 , Thomas Steiner wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
>> I was wondering if we might use:
>>  http://www.w3.org/ns/formats/
> Sounds like a good thing to do, if the list can be extended to contain
> 
> http://www.w3.org/ns/formats/microformats
> http://www.w3.org/ns/formats/microdata
> along the already present
> http://www.w3.org/ns/formats/RDFa
> 
> With regards to MIME types and file extensions for common RDF
> serializations, those, as far as I can tell from the various specs or
> spec-like documents, are meant to be as follows (where sometimes
> common practice differs):
> 
> RDF/XML: application/rdf+xml (*.rdf)
> Turtle: text/turtle (*.ttl)
> N3: text/n3 (*.n3)
> NTriples: text/plain (*.nt)
> 
> This list, as Nathan points out, leaves out embedded RDF/semantics
> like RDFa, micro{data|formats}.
> 
> I think using an extended list based on http://www.w3.org/ns/formats/
> is a good solution. Plus a name change to the API ;-)
> 
> Best,
> Tom
> 
> -- 
> Thomas Steiner, Research Scientist, Google Inc.
> http://blog.tomayac.com, http://twitter.com/tomayac


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf