[foaf-dev] text/n3 and text/turtle (was FOAF stuff)

Ivan Herman ivan at w3.org
Mon May 4 13:23:08 CEST 2009


Hugh,

Strictly speaking, n3 is a superset of turtle. Indeed, n3 includes some
syntactic sugars not in turtle (plus extra functionalities on rules).
Hence the existence of both media types...

If you do some sort of content negotiation, then serving the same file
as text/turtle or text/n3, depending on what the request is, seems to be
a good approach to me...

Ivan

Hugh Glaser wrote:
> Sorry to be a little unsure of the final outcome.
> So the decision is text/n3 and text/turtle?
> And we should be serving with type text/turtle for
> http://southampton.rkbexplorer.com/models/void.ttl
> But could also serve the same file (with type text/turtle?) in response to a
> content request for text/n3 (since it is compatible) and possibly some other
> things.
> Best
> Hugh
> (Hoping he can be told, so he doesn't have to read and try to understand all
> the specs!)
> 
> 
> On 29/04/2009 22:42, "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl at w3.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 2009-04 -29, at 12:52, Ian Davis wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/ says text/turtle
>>>
>>> http://www.dajobe.org/2004/01/turtle/ says application/turtle
>>>  
>>> Both say application/x-turtle should be used until the registration is
>>> submitted. Maybe that's the right approach for now.
>> No, that is NOT the right approach to use x-.
>> X- has been out of fashion for years.   You should go straight to
>> using the proposed content type, and save the world the pain of another
>> transition.
>>
>> So it looks then like text/n3 and text/turtle.
>>
>> Tim
> 
> On 30/04/2009 11:21, "Ivan Herman" <ivan at w3.org> wrote:
> 
>> The team submission (co-signed by Dave B) is the one we should follow in
>> my view.
>>
>> Ivan
>>
>> Ian Davis wrote:
>>> http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/ says text/turtle
>>>
>>> http://www.dajobe.org/2004/01/turtle/ says application/turtle
>>>
>>> Both say application/x-turtle should be used until the registration is
>>> submitted. Maybe that's the right approach for now.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl at w3.org
>>> <mailto:timbl at w3.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     The tabulator code has
>>>
>>>
>>>     sf.mediatypes['text/n3'] = {'q': '1.0'} // as per 2008 spec
>>>
>>>     sf.mediatypes['text/rdf+n3'] = {'q': 0.5} // pre 2008 spec
>>>     sf.mediatypes['application/x-turtle'] = {'q': 0.2} // pre 2008
>>>     sf.mediatypes['text/turtle'] = {'q': 1.0} // pre 2008
>>>
>>>     The application for text/n3 is pending, but I can't remember what he
>>>     status of *turtle*.  I think it was switched to text/turtle, but not
>>>     sure.
>>>
>>>     Tim
>>>
>>>
>>>     On 2009-04 -29, at 10:38, Ian Davis wrote:
>>>
>>>>     On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl at w3.org
>>>>     <mailto:timbl at w3.org>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>         Hugh,
>>>>
>>>>         http://southampton.rkbexplorer.com/models/void.ttl
>>>>         is served up as text/plain -- could you serve it as text/n3 ?
>>>>
>>>>         Thanks, Tim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     Is text/n3 best or application/turtle? Neither are registered but
>>>>     application/turtle would be most accurate. I'm only asking because
>>>>     I'm currently serving up turtle from http://ol.dataincubator.org/
>>>>     as text/plain and I'd like to fix that.
>>>>
>>>>     Ian
>>>>
>>>
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3213 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.foaf-project.org/pipermail/foaf-dev/attachments/20090504/e35c8b41/attachment.bin 


More information about the foaf-dev mailing list