When I try to resolve an IRI of a SHACL element, such as https://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#ShapesGraph, I am taken to an HTML page, not the RDF. This is both annoying - two clicks and not Linked Data. We find RDF namespace elements resolving to for other W3C specs, viz.:
http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Classhttp://www.w3.org/ns/sosa/observedProperty - when Content Negotiation for an RDF format is usehttp://www.w3.org/2006/time#TemporalEntity
Can we please implement Conneg as per SOSA so we either get definitions in the Core spec (yes, some elements are missing) or the RDF?
Should we add an HTML piece for every element in the Core vocab to the Core spec?
When I try to resolve an IRI of a SHACL element, such as
https://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#ShapesGraph, I am taken to an HTML page, not the RDF. This is both annoying - two clicks and not Linked Data. We find RDF namespace elements resolving to for other W3C specs, viz.:http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Classhttp://www.w3.org/ns/sosa/observedProperty- when Content Negotiation for an RDF format is usehttp://www.w3.org/2006/time#TemporalEntityCan we please implement Conneg as per SOSA so we either get definitions in the Core spec (yes, some elements are missing) or the RDF?
Should we add an HTML piece for every element in the Core vocab to the Core spec?