Re: How to express dereferenceability? (ISSUE-91)

On 1/19/15 10:13 AM, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
>> 	• Is being dereferenceable a characteristic (I hesitate to say "property" as that's a somewhat loaded term) of the URI or the resource that URI identifies?
> That's a crucial issue IMHO.
> Following the RDF spec, the properties/objects we add
> are characteristics of the underlying resource,
> not of the IRI by which its happens to be referred.
>
> As such, I think both proposed solutions
> (hydra:Resource / hydra:dereferenceable)
> are in conflict with the RDF spec.

Yes!!

>
> Note BTW that I personally don't agree
> that a server should express dereferenceability:
> - the server doesn't know what the client wants to do
> - the client can deference easily anyway

+1

> However, I launched this issue because others think differently.

They have though differently for years. Net effect, yet another basis 
for confusion re: AWWW, RDF, Linked Data etc..

Names identify things.

Identification is an act of interpretation that binds denotation to 
connotation via some kind of indirection mechanism.

All of this predates the Web.

It just so happens that URIs are ingeniously designed such that you can 
have an HTTP scheme URI that has interpretation delivered gratis (even 
though this is clearly unrecognized by most, hence the endless confusion).

Kingsley
>
> Best,
>
> Ruben
>


-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this