- From: Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:37:32 +0100
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- CC: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>, Michel_Dumontier <Michel_Dumontier@carleton.ca>, public-semweb-lifesci <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, Mark Wilkinson <markw@illuminae.com>, Benjamin Good <goodb@interchange.ubc.ca>, Natalia Villanueva Rosales <naty.vr@gmail.com>
Alan > Except this isn't an issue. A link in the html suffices to let them > know where the RDF is, and the extra retrieval isn't going to kill > them. There are plenty of alternatives for optimization (google's site > map file comes to mind, or the LINK: http header) that are not prone > to unnecessarily introducing avoidable ambiguity on the semantic web. The specs like GRDDL, RDFa etc. are designed to provide the RDF representation of some information resource. So, it saves authors from generating RDF documents for their respective HTML/XML pages that are already there. But to use this as a general bridge to any resource or as a substitute for content negotiation, IMHO, missed the point. For instance, the descriptions of two different proteins can be merged in one HTML/RDF document. Then if another party wants to make assertions about one of the "proteins" in question, how can you do that unambiguously without giving each protein a URI? Xiaoshu
Received on Monday, 16 July 2007 10:38:10 UTC