- From: Jan Algermissen <algermissen1971@mac.com>
- Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 01:27:36 +0200
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On Apr 5, 2010, at 1:17 AM, Nathan wrote: > Hi All, > > I've hit upon something which may be a future issue (unsure). > > As the read/write web of data is realised (and assuming that RDF remains > the primary datatype for linked data), then machines will become reliant > on specific ontologies in some use-cases. > > With XML we have things like Atom - application/atom+xml. However if > Atom were in RDF instead, and any serialization could be used > (n3/rdf/xml etc), then how would one create a media type for it? > > Major / commonly used ontologies will arise; just as with the many > registered ****+xml media types, there may be a need for ****+rdf but > without the limitation of a specific serialization, or with the addition > of multiple serializations. > > Examples: Machines / Agents may wish to indicate they "Accept:" a > specific ontology "i understand x ontology / type of data in y&z > serializations" - perhaps foaf-onto+rdf on the client side or > diff-onto+rdf on the server side (accept-patch). > > Perhaps a non-issue, but worth mentioning I hope, I usually address the subclassing issue (which is primarily an issue of expressing a client side capability of expectation, IMHO) with a profile parameter on the media type(s) in the Accept header: Accept: application/rdf+xml;profile=http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/ The server can respond with just Content-Type: application/rdf+xml or, if desired, with a 406 Not Acceptable if the profile 'request' cannot be satisfied. Jan > > Many Regards, > > Nathan > > > > > ----------------------------------- Jan Algermissen, Consultant NORD Software Consulting Mail: algermissen@acm.org Blog: http://www.nordsc.com/blog/ Work: http://www.nordsc.com/ -----------------------------------
Received on Sunday, 4 April 2010 23:28:17 UTC