- From: Sebastian Hellmann <hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 14:38:07 +0100
- To: Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@atomgraph.com>, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>
Hi Martynas, On 21.01.22 14:11, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > Agents should use content negotiation to retrieve the most appropriate > RDF format. WebID documents are not different from Linked Data in > general in that respect. Content negotiation is a cool method to deliver different formats. I have a question for this one actually. Is there some official document that describes the relation between content negotiation and linked data? It isn't mentioned here: https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html and otherwise I only know this one: https://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/ . LDP mentions it in 4.3.2 HTTP GET . They also follow an approach, where only Turtle and JSON-LD are a MUST and also define Turtle as the default. Any other document that is relevant and official here? We recently started to put our WebIDs on github.io: https://kurzum.github.io/webid.ttl (sufficient security for non-critical services). Not sure, github.io even allows content negotiation. It is quite obvious that each additional MUST requirement in the WebID spec or any WebID spec will add a barrier towards adoption. Not sure, if there are strong use cases for the content negotiation MUST. I found it quite practical, that you can just put a file on a web server (in this case github.io ) to serve as webid. Anyhow, I see that the "Wallet Connect" login in Crypto became quite adopted with hundred of wallet implementations, so maybe a similar technology like WebID (probably based on pure JSON) will be developed and widely adopted from this side. -- Sebastian
Received on Friday, 21 January 2022 13:38:25 UTC