Re: 303 +1, WSDL -1 from Alan Ruttenberg on 2007-07-16 (public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org from July 2007)

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:41:18 -0400
To: ogbujic@ccf.org
Cc: "Balaji S. Srinivasan" <balajis@stanford.edu>, "public-semweb-lifesci" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Message-Id: <7EB53B8C-3572-469C-A351-BCE138550012@gmail.com>

Also the URI opacity 'principle' is not an absolute prohibition. The  
principle is that you don't include information in a URI without  
documenting what that information is, so that people don't have to  
guess. If you publish it, for example by documenting it as RDF using  
some vocabulary that our community comes to agreement about, and  
which we publish as another document on the semantic web, then it is  
fine.

-Alan

On Jul 16, 2007, at 10:12 AM, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote:

> +1, Absolutely.  Bear in mind that the URI opacity 'principle' has  
> to do
> with machine consumption not human consumption, so complete  
> obfuscation
> is not helpful for human consumption / curation.

Received on Monday, 16 July 2007 15:41:26 UTC