W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > May 2003


From: Piotr Kaminski <piotr@ideanest.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 13:33:35 -0700
To: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000b01c31e45$ef851980$0502a8c0@transfinity>


I'm happy to see a tighter spec (and implementation) of the ideas you
proposed on the TAG mailing list a while ago.  Two quibbles, though.

Why restrict semantic web servers to deal in RDF only?  I would think the
usual content type negotiation techniques could be used, so that URIQA could
be applied to any semantic web languages (e.g. XTM, N3, robots.txt, etc.).
Restricting the documents to RDF seems akin to forcing all
representation-based HTTP messages to deal only in HTML.

Why restrict all replies to a concise bounded description?  If an agent is
interested in information "around" a resource, right now it would have to
issue a (potentially large) number of individual requests.  Adding an
optional "expansion depth" parameter to the GET query would provide a simple
way to grab information in bigger chunks.  Also, the given definition of
concise bounded description may not translate well to other languages, so if
you go for the first idea above, the spec would need more general wording.

I really like the proposal overall, though.

		-- P.

  Piotr Kaminski (piotr@ideanest.com)
  It's the heart afraid of breaking that never learns to dance.
Received on Monday, 19 May 2003 16:33:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:42 UTC