- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 13:14:44 +0000
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Cc: RDF interest group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
It turns out that getting Apache to serve application/rdf+xml is dead easy. Simply adding the following line to one's .htaccess file does the trick for *.rdf files. AddType application/rdf+xml .rdf #g -- At 13:31 19/03/04 -0500, Dan Brickley wrote: >* Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org> [2004-03-19 17:20+0000] > > > > I'm wondering how many applications/systems are actually set up to serve > > RDF as application/rdf+xml. A brief exploration with Google suggests that > > many RDF files are currently served as text/plain or text/xml, and just a > > few as application/rdf+xml. > > > > Is this typical? > >Depends how you want to count, perhaps. There are pushing 2 million >RDF files served from LiveJournal as application/rdf+xml, for example. >(eg. http://www.livejournal.com/users/danbri/data/foaf). Similarly from >TypePad eg http://foaf.typepad.com/foaf.rdf -- in general when >providers make FOAF profile documents available, they use the right >type. With RSS I think the situation is more complex, and >application/rss+xml or somesuch might be common. > >Stats from a recent RDF crawler might be interesting; Google doesn't >follow RDF-to-RDF rdfs:seeAlso references... > >Dan ------------ Graham Klyne For email: http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Tuesday, 23 March 2004 08:15:13 UTC