Re: RDDL->RDF (was Re: Draft agenda of 22 February 2005 TAG from Henry S. Thompson on 2005-02-23 (www-tag@w3.org from February 2005)

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:45:34 +0000
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5bfyznimgh.fsf@erasmus.inf.ed.ac.uk>

Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> writes:

> * Henry S. Thompson wrote:
>>Any RDDL document.  For example,
>>
>>  http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema.html.
>
> What makes people think sending RDDL documents
> as text/html is licenced by any specification?

Well, that document is valid (modular) XHTML. . .

All my browsers render it very nicely. . .

What are you suggesting it _should_ be served as?

ht
-- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]

Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2005 10:45:37 UTC