- From: Andreas Harth <harth@kit.edu>
- Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 01:03:45 +0200
- To: Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois.86@gmail.com>, "Svensson, Lars" <L.Svensson@dnb.de>, Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>, Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
- CC: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Hi, On 09/22/16 22:32, Maxime Lefrançois wrote: > Dear all, > > my two cents: > > >> Particular serializations of both the feature and geometry data can >> be > negotiated either way, I >> think. If one request a feature with contentType >> application/rdf+xml; geomdata=“WKTLiteral”, then the geometry if >> requested / returned > should include an >> asWKT. > > While I agree that this would be very handy indeed, I don't think > http allows that kind of syntax in the Accept-header, at least not > for all media types and certainly not for application/rdf+xml > > > using > > Accept: application/rdf+xml;geomdata="WKTLiteral" > > Would be perfectly ok as per RFC 2045 and updated by RFC 2184. But > parameter geomdata is neither defined as a required, nor as an > optional parameter in media type application/rdf+xml. > http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/rdf+xml > > What could be possible on the other hand, would be to define a new > media type such as application/geomdata+rdf+xml for instance (not > sure if the use of two '+' would be allowed, I can ask. and to > register it following https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2004/0430-mime a straightforward alternative is to give the geometry a URI and do plain content negotiation. Problem solved. I do not understand why people would bend over backwards to put possibly very large GML/WKT/KML data (or other "binary" content) in RDF literals. Cheers, Andreas. PS. FWIW, it would be useful to have a IANA-registered content type for WKT and GML [1]. KML and GeoJSON have one. [1] http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml
Received on Thursday, 22 September 2016 23:04:21 UTC