> the Library of Congress has developed MODS/RDF
Thanks for that! It will be VERY interesting to read!
I have not read all these examples, yet. Nonetheless, I wonder why the
mods files have an "xml" file name extension and are sent with the
application/xml Content-Type HTTP response header. According to
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6207#section-2 edited by Ray, the suggested
file name extension is .mods and the suggested media type is
application/mods+xml for mods files.
Furthermore, the rdf files are send with the text/plain Content-Type HTTP response header whereas
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3870.txt suggests application/rdf+xml as a media type.
What are the reasons for these unexpected choices?
I also noticed that
http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/modsrdf/v1/ does not comply with the recommendation described at
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-CSS-TECHS/#style-color-contrast which reads:
> "If specifying a foreground color, always specify a background color as well (and vice versa)"
In some circumstances, this is highly significant for readability.
I hope this helps!