W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > September 2009

Re: What about music-related URIs???

From: Kurt J <kurtjx@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 14:24:20 +0100
Message-ID: <b55af8eb0909060624n5f039bc4t35a43af86e036aec@mail.gmail.com>
To: music-ontology-specification-group@googlegroups.com
Cc: Linking Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>
Hi Nick,

> It is a dilemma indeed. I think we need to make a effort to get RDF/
> RDFa on to musicbrainz.org and then we can use the 'proper' URIs. I
> have been holding back from doing this because the codebase has been
> changing so much - but there is a big new release coming soon....

i like using the actual musicbrainz URIs as well.  to be clear, the
artist URI would be of the form

http://musicbrainz.org/artist/<mbid number>

similarly the track URI would be

http://musicbrainz.org/track/<mbid number>

and the release (record) URI would be

http://musicbrainz.org/release/<mbid number>

i've noticed that currently the release-based URIs return 404 unless
you put '.html' on the end

http://musicbrainz.org/release/3de4b060-3930-4d6f-8c4f-7135b7d70fb6  ->  404

http://musicbrainz.org/release/3de4b060-3930-4d6f-8c4f-7135b7d70fb6.html
-> page about this release

track and artist URIs seem to redirect sensibly to a human-readable page.

So do you advocate using the Musicbrainz 'proper' URIs now?  Any guess
on how soon they might include RDF(a) ?

-Kurt J
Received on Sunday, 6 September 2009 13:24:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:23 UTC