- From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
- Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 20:06:11 +0200
- To: public-rww@w3.org
On Sunday 16. September 2012 17.47.50 Kingsley Idehen wrote: > Don't you get that via a graph based on an ontology like VoID? Worst > case, whatever might be missing is simply added by way of ontology > extension? I'm not sure I understood your question, but I think the question is partly yes and partly no: VoID already does the read-only parts of it, but has no support for rw-operations, and yes, what I do propose in my paper is a simple vocabulary for doing the rw-operations. > > The two different approaches are likely to make sense in different > > cases, but I can't make a clear recommendation in which cases. > > I think we can arrive at a solution that's truly protocol agnostic. As > you know, REST isn't http: scheme specific Exactly. My solution is protocol agnostic. Best, Kjetil
Received on Monday, 17 September 2012 18:06:37 UTC