W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > April 2007

Re: Option 1 - HTTP 303 Re: Towards a TAG consideration of CURIEs

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 00:05:42 -0400
Message-ID: <f6ec8dcb0704092105l19fe3bb1t9664b62a17cab84d@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-tag@w3.org
Cc: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, semantic-web@w3.org

>> I would recommend that each document be available in both HTML and
>> RDF using content negotiation or just RDF with a style sheet that
>> makes it legible, or just HTML with GRDDL.

> -1 for content negotiation. (very un-semantic web like to have non-
> inspectable communications, and confusion about what a name=URI means)
> +1 for RDF + style sheet. (very semantic-web like to have knowledge  first, and presentation separated)

Actually, I think machine-readable with follow-your-nose-hooks to get
human-readable data and vice versa are both equally advantageous (none
is more semantic-web-like than the other).  It's more a question of
the system (or network) the data are in and whether you have more
human consumers than machine consumers.

For the general case you still (currently) have more human consumers
than machine consumers, so there is a *slight* advantage in presenting
HTML, XHTML, or well-formed but invalid XHTML, and allowing the
smaller population of consumers to get RDF on demand (GRDDL, HTTP /
HTML metadata & links,RDFa,...)

-- Chimezie
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2007 04:05:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:14 GMT