W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > March 2005

RE: [ALL] proposed resolution httpRange-14

From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 11:29:52 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20050324111411.0338f6f8@127.0.0.1>
To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
Cc: <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

At 03:59 PM 3/24/2005 +0000, Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote:
>for some property named http://www.foo.com/vocab#prop , if the resource http://www.foo.com/vocab supported GET with a SPARQL query as a parameter, then there's no problem for large vocabs.

This works if the client/agent also specifies (only?) media type
'application' in the accept header of the http request, as that puts
the semantics of the fragment identifier component squarely
under the control of a spec we (the Semantic Web Activity)
could write rather than the HTTP or HTML specifications, per
section 3.5 of RFC 3986 [1].

  [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt

I don't know if it would be considered legitimate to include a SPARQL
query with an 'accept: */*' header; perhaps DAWG will address
this question.  The 14 January SPARQL Protocol for RDF WD [2]
offers some enticing hints but I don't see that it directly answers this.
(It could also be implicit in a way that isn't clear to me at the moment.)

  [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-protocol-20050114/
Received on Thursday, 24 March 2005 16:29:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:07 UTC