W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2007

Re: XML Schema draft populates the intersection of Language and InformationResource [ISSUE-14 httpRange-14]

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 07:47:17 -0500
To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1191242837.16975.233.camel@pav>


On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 01:47 -0400, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
> On Sep 28, 2007, at 6:29 PM, Dan Connolly wrote:
> 
> > I'd really rather not put 303 redirect configuration in the  
> > critical path to deployment of garden variety Semantic Web data.  
> > The <doc#term> technique is available to ordinary authors who can  
> > only use ftp to upload data to the web.
> 
> Dan,
> 
> This is a critical point, and one of the basic problems with aligning  
> the RDF world with the web and particularly http. On the Semantic  
> Web, we need to see everything visible in the RDF. Anything that  
> encodes some aspect of the meaning of a thing in the http protocol  
> and doesn't surface it in the RDF will lose when made available by  
> any other protocol (like from a triple store).

Not necessarily; for example,
the tabulator (http://www.w3.org/2005/ajar/tab )
copies http info into its triple store.

>  It's one of the  
> reasons that content negotiation is a loser for the Semantic Web,  

You lost me there. Care to elaborate, step-by-step?

> and, similarly, solutions that rely on response codes such as 303,  
> since both of these mechanisms are http dependent.
> 
> -Alan
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 1 October 2007 12:47:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:54 UTC