- From: Josh Sled <jsled@asynchronous.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 22:52:11 -0500
- To: Rodrigo Dias Arruda Senra <rsenra@acm.org>
- Cc: dviner@apache.org, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 19:22, Rodrigo Dias Arruda Senra wrote:
> I like its minimalistic nature. However, a generic web page might
> have rdf embedded in it. Worse, it might be a xml-rdf resource itself
> not its meta-information.
I'd rather have data than metadata, so this doesn't seem _worse_,
exactly. :)
> So, using Accept:mime-type to differ from resource and resource's meta-info
> might lead to ambiguity IMO.
URIs identify resources; the Accept header should serve only to
negotiate the format of that resource, not to branch between different
resources... you may want the HTML meta-data about the RDF data,
someday. :)
Why not have a URI for the resource, and a URI for the meta-data?
GET /foo
<foo>
<link rel="meta" href="/foo/meta" />
</foo>
...jsled
--
http://asynchronous.org/ - `a=jsled; b=asynchronous.org; echo ${a}@${b}`
Received on Saturday, 2 April 2005 03:52:12 UTC