- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 12:29:30 +0100
- To: Max Voelkel <voelkel@fzi.de>
- Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
On 13 Nov 2006, at 22:48, Max Voelkel wrote: >> Which brings us back to the start of the thread: If http:// >> example.com/resources#Bob is a non-information resource, how to >> correctly serve both HTML and RDF descriptions? > No problem. > >> The problem is that >> the semantics of a fragment identifier depend on the content type. I >> wonder if this means we also have to do a 303 at http://example.com/ >> resources before we can serve a description of #Bob. > > As defined in the URI spec, we send only the URI http://example.com/ > resources > (of course using content-negotiation). So if we are a browser, we > get back HTML, > scroll down to "#Bob", if defined, done. > If we are a semantic web agent, we Accept: application/rdf+xml > and get back an > RDF/XML file. We parse it an look up statements about bob. We > can ignore all > other statements which are not directly or indirectly connected to > bob. OK. Wouldn't that leave us with an ambiguity as to what #Bob is? The meaning of a fragment identifier depends on the content type. Depending on what we asked for, #Bob could be a part of an HTML document, or #Bob could be something that according to authoritative RDF statements is a person. If we answer 303 if asked for HTML, then the server essentially says, "Sorry, I can't give you an HTML representation of http://example.com/ resources (because then you could wrongly conclude that #Bob is a part of an HTML document), but over there is another resource that might be relevant to your request." Richard > > Kind Regards, > Max > -- > Max Völkel (http://Xam.de) > Forschungszentrum Informatik (fzi.de) > job: +49 721 9654-854 | mobil: +49 171 8359678 > > >
Received on Tuesday, 14 November 2006 11:29:52 UTC