CommentResponse:JL-6

From SPARQL Working Group
Jump to: navigation, search

James Leigh wrote:

> Hello editors,
> 
> In the two summary tables of the SPARQL 1.1 Protocol document the
> Request Content Type of "application/x-www-url-form-urlencoded" should
> be changed to "application/x-www-form-urlencoded" to align with the rest
> of the world.
> 
> In section 2.1.2 the paragraph should read (the last media type was
> fixed):
>         Protocol clients may send protocol requests via the HTTP POST
>         method by URL encoding the parameters. When using this method,
>         clients must URL percent encode [RFC3986] all parameters and
>         include them as parameters within the request body via the
>         application/x-www-form-urlencoded media type with the name given
>         above. Parameters must be separated with the ampersand (&)
>         character. Clients may include the parameters in any order. The
>         content type header of the HTTP request must be set to
>         application/x-www-form-urlencoded.
> 
> In section 2.2.1 the paragraph should read (the last media type was
> fixed):
>         Protocol clients may send update protocol requests via the HTTP
>         POST method by URL encoding the parameters. When using this
>         approach, clients must URL percent encode [RFC3986] all
>         parameters and include them as parameters within the request
>         body via the application/x-www-form-urlencoded media type with
>         the name given above. Parameters must be separated with the
>         ampersand (&) character. Clients may include the parameters in
>         any order. The content type header of the HTTP request must be
>         set to application/x-www-form-urlencoded.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-sparql11-protocol-20121108/#query-operation
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-sparql11-protocol-20121108/#update-operation

James,

You are correct, this is a typo in the Protocol document. The typo has been fixed in the editor's draft of the document and will be included as the document moves towards recommendation. We also verified that the protocol validator[1] being used by the working group to verify implementation conformance already uses the correct media type (indicating that implementors did not copy this typo).

thanks, Gregory Williams, on behalf of the SPARQL WG

[1] http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/protocol_validator