Re: containers examples should end in /

hello henry.

On 2013-01-14 18:39 , "Henry Story" <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
>Anyway, if you look at my argument carefully, you'll see I show
>how both ways of writing containers can be made to work.
>I am pointing out the consequences of doing it one way or
>the other, with the obvious conclusion that having containers
>ending in "/" is more elegant for writing things out in the
>spec and more intuitive for people coming to RDF as newbies.

+1. if i had to implement LDP, i'd choose /-terminated as the convention
for container URIs, and i would set up redirects from the non-/-terminated
URIs so that the "other notation" would behave gracefully. and you're
certainly right that, depending on what the canonical name is, relative
URIs have to served differently, and serving relative URIs would be a nice
thing to do, at least as an option.

however, it may be interesting to note that most web sites, where
hierarchies are frequently used, tend to use the non-/-terminated URIs as
canonical names (and rarely set up redirects from the /-terminated
variations). i guess in these cases the thinking often is that these
"container pages" should look and feel like "normal pages", and that
/-terminated URIs thus would look a bit odd.

cheers,

dret.

Received on Monday, 14 January 2013 18:18:38 UTC