W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2004

Re: 3023 update (was Re: Agenda TAG Telcon: 8th Nov 2004)

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 03:54:27 -0500
To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <20041121085427.GA25361@homer.w3.org>

* Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> [2004-11-20 19:35-0800]
> On Nov 20, 2004, at 3:00 PM, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> >That is a very significant generalization you've made there. 
> >Considering that both IIS and Apache default to serving files that end 
> >in ".xml" as some */xml MIME type are you claiming that they are both 
> >buggy or that every time someone puts a file that ends in ".xml" on 
> >the Web it is a bug?
> I think that a file whose extension is .xml is usually evidence of a 
> bug, yes.  Because the file is usually something else (often RSS), and 
> the .xml is hiding that. -Tim
Oh, interesting. This shakes out slightly differently in RDF, where often
we're never sure if it's a "Dublin Core", "FOAF", "Creative Commons",
"DOAP,"Wordnet", "MusicBrainz" or "FOAF" file, since those 
vocabs/namespaces only define dictionaries of terms that can get mixed t
ogether. The mixing is a blessing and a curse. RSS1 is a little different 
'cos the spec (just about...) defines a document class too...

So RDF files are typically served application/rdf+xml though often 
they have a "dominant namespace" whose presence drives the data 
structures, with other namespaces typically being somewhat 
annotational in their use. 

Received on Sunday, 21 November 2004 08:54:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:44 UTC