[contents]

About This Document

This pages captures outstanding issues in the HTTP Vocabulary in RDF Working Draft of 23 March 2007. The Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG) intends to address these issues in future updates of the working draft. Please send comments and feedback to the the mailing list of the ERT WG. The archives for this list are publicly available. This document is an on-going work in progress and is subject to change at any time without advance notice (see also list of known issues for the previous working draft).

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
   • 1.1. Vocabulary Scope
   • 1.2. Namespaces
   • 1.3. Naming Conventions
   • 1.4. Use Cases
2. Basic HTTP 1.1 (RFC 2616)
   • 2.1. Connection Class
   • 2.2. Request Class
   • 2.3. Request URI Property
   • 2.4. Response Class
   • 2.5. Response Code Property
   • 2.6. Header Property
   • 2.7. Message Header Class
   • 2.8. Header Element Class
   • 2.9. Param Class
   • 2.10. Body Property
3. Header Name Class

Appendices

1. Schema in RDF/XML
   • A.1. HTTP Schema
   • A.2. HTTP-Header Schema
2. Security and Privacy
3. Vocabulary Terms
4. Practical Example
5. Document Changes
6. References

1. Introduction

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

1.1. Vocabulary Scope

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

1.2. Namespaces

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

1.3. Naming Conventions

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

1.4. Use Cases

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

2. Basic HTTP 1.1 (RFC 2616)

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

2.1. Connection Class

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

• [ISSUE-001] What about failing connections, invalid responses? Jo Rabin in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0050.html

2.2. Request Class

• [ISSUE-003] Timestamp requests. Jo Rabin in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0050.html, Shuaib Karim in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Apr/0020.html
• [ISSUE-004] It the request method extension mechanism modelled in this specification? Jo Rabin in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0050.html

2.3. Request URI Property

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

2.4. Response Class

• [ISSUE-002] Timestamp responses. Jo Rabin in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0050.html, Shuaib Karim in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Apr/0020.html

2.5. Response Code Property

• [ISSUE-005] Why are RFC2518 headers predefined, while RFC2518 status codes are not? So this is a consistency question. Julian Reschke in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0098.html

  (See also HTTP Status Code Registry)

• [ISSUE-010] If <http:GetRequest> is appropriate, why not <http:200Response> (or <http:RequestGet> and <http:Response200>) ? Alan Dean in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0100.html
• [ISSUE-020] The purpose of “New Response Code” is not clear. Shuaib Karim in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Apr/0016.html

2.6. Header Property

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

2.7. Message Header Class

• [ISSUE-006] Semantic equivalence of literal vs. decomposed field values. Alan Dean in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0100.html
• [ISSUE-007] Semantic equivalence of literal vs. referenced field names. Alan Dean in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0100.html
• [ISSUE-008] Why have a list of "predefined" field names? Implementation too complicated with no benefit. Alan Dean in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0100.html
• [ISSUE-009] Have a method property with literal objects instead of subclasses of Request for each method. Alan Dean in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0100.html

2.8. Header Element Class.

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

2.9. Param Class

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

2.10. Body Property

• [ISSUE-014] Encapsulation of XML version 1.1 in XML 1.0 serialization of RDF. Eric Prud'hommeaux in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0108.html
• [ISSUE-015] Encapsulation of document type declarations in RDF/XML. Eric Prud'hommeaux in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0108.html
• [ISSUE-017] Data URL without media type means 'text/plain;charset=US-ASCII'. Johannes Koch in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Apr/0014.html

3. Header Name Class

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

Appendices

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

A. Schema in RDF/XML

• [ISSUE-016] Two separate formal specifications: one to express constraints that are true in a RDF world (in term of OWL constraints and semantics); one to express constraints on a subset at the XML level. Dominique Hazael-Massieux in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Apr/0008 (Although this is a comment about EARL, it may still be applicable to HTTP-in-RDF.)

A.1. HTTP Schema

• [ISSUE-012] Use rdf:isDefinedBy to include information of the RFCs defining parts of the vocabulary. Al Gilman in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0101.html
• [ISSUE-018] Problems according to RDFS or OWL syntax. Shuaib Karim in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Apr/0016.html

A.2. HTTP-Header Schema

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

• [ISSUE-013] Use rdf:isDefinedBy to include information of the RFCs defining parts of the vocabulary. Al Gilman in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0101.html
• [ISSUE-019] Problems according to RDFS or OWL syntax. Shuaib Karim in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Apr/0016.html

B. Security and Privacy

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

C. Vocabulary Terms

• [ISSUE-011] Terms are not defined by the HTTP-in-RDF document. Al Gilman in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0101.html

D. Practical Example

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

E. Document Changes

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.

F. References

The are currently no open issues for this section of the document.