- From: Leigh Dodds <leigh@ldodds.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 09:26:37 +0100
- To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>, Jonathan A Rees <rees@mumble.net>, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, public-lod community <public-lod@w3.org>, Ian Davis <me@iandavis.com>
Hi Tim, On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org> wrote: > ... > For example, To take an arbitrary one of the trillions out there, what does > http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?fk_files=2372108&pageno=11 > identify, there being no RDF in it? > What can I possibly do with that URI if the publisher has not explicitly > allowed me to use it > to refer to the online book, under your proposal? You can do anything you want with it. You could use record statements about your HTTP interactions, e.g. retrieval status & date. Or, because RDF lets anyone, say anything, anywhere, you could just decide to use that as the URI for the book and annotate it accordingly. The obvious caveat and risk is that the publisher might subsequently disagree with you if they do decide to publish some RDF. I can re-use your data if I decide that risk is acceptable and we can still usefully interact. Even if Gutenberg.org did publish some RDF at that URI, you still have the risk that they could change their mind at a later date. httprange-14 doesn't help at all there. Lack of precision and inconsistency is going to be rife whatever form the URIs or response codes used. Encouraging people to say what their URIs refer to is the very first piece of best practice advice. L.
Received on Monday, 26 March 2012 08:27:14 UTC