- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:27:39 +0100
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- CC: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
sorry, wrong list, my address book played me tricks with auto-completion :-) Axel Polleres wrote: > As a lightweight version of Option 7, which reuires content negotiation > to receive the RDF service description on the endpoint URL, there > occurred some sub-options in the discussion today, which I try to > summarize below: > > Option 7' (RDFa): If HTML is served instead of RDF at the endpoint > location (e.g. a query form), then allow it to have implicitly the RDF > of the service description in the form of RDFa > > con: RDFa needs to be parsed/extracted to get RDF out > > Option 7'' (LINK element) > If HTML is served instead of RDF at the endpoint location (e.g. a query > form), then allow it to have a <link> element in the HTML head pointing > to the service description > > con: needs 2 requests (which originally was the strongest argument > against Option 1) > > Option 7''': either of Option 7'/7'' in combination with the pure Option > 7, i.e. if content type HTML is requested, require anyways Option 7' or > 7'', when content type RDF is requested, serve description directly. > > Axel > > > -- Dr. Axel Polleres Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, Galway email: axel.polleres@deri.org url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 15:28:15 UTC