- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 13:01:59 +0300
- To: "ext Andy Powell" <a.powell@ukoln.ac.uk>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
On Apr 11, 2005, at 12:38, ext Andy Powell wrote: > On Sun, 10 Apr 2005, Patrick Stickler wrote: > >> E.g. what if your sw agent prefers N3, or XTM, or TriX, and all >> are supported by the given server. If you've used conneg to get >> the description itself, what do you use to ask the server for >> a prefered encoding? > > You use a MIME type that is specific enough to ask for the encoding of > the description that you want. ??? I don't think you groked what I was asking. > >> In short, using conneg to provide URIQA-like functionality is >> a misuse of conneg. It's a hack. And it precludes using conneg >> for what it was intended for. > > I'm still confused... supposing that for a particular resource my > server supports the following representations > > HTML > PDF > RDF+XML > RDF+N3 > > You seem to be saying that it's OK to use conneg to ask for the first > two of these... but it's not OK to use it to request the other two? Not at all. You can certainly use conneg to ask for an RDF/XML or N3 encoded representation -- but such a representation will not necessarily (or even likely) be a CBD. > > Supposing also that my server supports a 'complex object' > representation - for example, a METS package that contains both the > HTML and the RDF+XML representation? > > Am I allowed to use conneg to request that representation or not? Sure. Why not. I think you're missing one key point, and that is being able to ask for a CBD, not just a particular encoding format. Patrick > > Andy > -- > Distributed Systems, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK > http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell > tel: +44 1225 383933 msn: ukolnlisap@hotmail.com > Resource Discovery Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/
Received on Monday, 11 April 2005 10:02:34 UTC