W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sweo-ig@w3.org > November 2007

Re: need editing help on the cool URI document

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:27:08 +0000
Cc: Leo Sauermann <leo.sauermann@dfki.de>, W3C SWEO IG <public-sweo-ig@w3.org>, Max Völkel <voelkel@fzi.de>
Message-Id: <4888A9DE-F38E-4755-B94F-6C960CA5D2B8@cyganiak.de>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>

Ivan,

On 29 Nov 2007, at 12:22, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> The terms we currently use, "thing"/"other resource" and "web  
>> document"
>> are appropriate, sufficiently well-explained and correct. The
>> terminology has support from key TAG members, including TimBL. I  
>> don't
>> think that anything needs to be changed with regard to these terms.
>>
>
> Even if you choose to keep it that way, a note relating these terms to
> the current terms used in http-14 is useful. It can be a note in the
> appendix, but let us not pretend those terms are not in use  
> (regardless
> of their value, whether people like them or not...)

Yes, this is already done. The relation between "web document" and  
"information resource" is explained in the main text.

The term "non-information resource" does not occur in any W3C  
publication and should simply be forgotten.

Richard



>
>
> I.
>
>>> For this, I would ask TAG or SWD for help:
>>>    • example rules of thumb how to distinguish between document
>>> identifiers and concept identifiers (information and non-information
>>> resources). Write some wget examples that do that? Leo thinks we did
>>> not cover the crucial point yet: what is the definitive test to  
>>> get a
>>> URI for a non-information resource? Range-14 says: "If an "http"
>>> resource responds to a GET request with a 303 (See Other) response,
>>> then the resource identified by that URI could be any resource;"  
>>> Or is
>>> this such a problem at all? At the end the RDF:Type says what is  
>>> what.
>>> I would put that into the 4.6. implementation section.
>>
>> I think this has been answered exhaustively in TAG list discussions:
>> HTTP status codes can only distinguish between two kinds of URIs,  
>> "URIs
>> identifying a web document" and "URIs identifying something that  
>> may be
>> described inside a web document". Note that documents can describe  
>> other
>> documents, hence documents can be identified by URIs in both  
>> categories.
>> The question you are asking is not answerable (and not that  
>> interesting)
>> in web architecture.
>>
>> Do you think the draft needs clarification in this regard?
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>>
>>> best
>>> Leo
>>> -- 
>>> ____________________________________________________
>>> DI Leo Sauermann       http://www.dfki.de/~sauermann
>>>
>>> Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer
>>> Kuenstliche Intelligenz DFKI GmbH
>>> Trippstadter Strasse 122
>>> P.O. Box 2080           Fon:   +49 631 20575-116
>>> D-67663 Kaiserslautern  Fax:   +49 631 20575-102
>>> Germany                 Mail:  leo.sauermann@dfki.de
>>>
>>> Geschaeftsfuehrung:
>>> Prof.Dr.Dr.h.c.mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
>>> Dr. Walter Olthoff
>>> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
>>> Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
>>> Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
>>> ____________________________________________________
>>
>>
>
> -- 
>
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2007 13:27:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:58 UTC