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

Re: What if an URI also is a URL

From: r.j.koppes <rikkert@rikkertkoppes.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 19:13:32 +0200
Message-ID: <4666EB3C.6020408@rikkertkoppes.com>
To: semantic-web@w3.org
CC: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, "Lynn, James (Software Escalations)" <james.lynn@hp.com>

Ok, herby a follow-up to the semantic-web list.

To summarize:

Me: suppose I am identified by http://www.example.com/mophor and there 
is also a webpage http://www.example.com/mophor...

Tim: this is an error, by returning a 200 for the webpage, it is 
identified, so these are two different things. 
http://www.example.com/mophor#me would be ok

James: but what about fragment identifiers?

Tim: no problem, since the client strips off fragment identifiers, so 
accessing the web page http://www.example.com/mophor#me would identify 
http://www.example.com/mophor as a webpage by returning a 200 (this is 
my interpretation of what is said)

Now this raises the next question. Suppose I want to make a statement 
saying that info about me (http://www.example.com/mophor#me), can be 
found at http://www.example.com/mophor#me (opposed to for example 
http://www.example.com/mophor#myWife). How would I make a triple?

<http://www.example.com/mophor#me>
<http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#seeAlso>
<http://www.example.com/mophor#me>

seems to make no sense. As I understand from Tim's answer, putting some 
info at http://www.example.com/mophor#me does not identify a resource 
for http://www.example.com/mophor#me, but for 
http://www.example.com/mophor. Therefore the location of the information 
about me is not defined by a resource. Therefore I think it makes more 
sense to add the web url as a Literal, instead of a resource:

<http://www.example.com/mophor#me>
<http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#seeAlso>
"http://www.example.com/mophor#me"

or with a blank node that identifies the web location:

<http://www.example.com/mophor#me>
<http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#seeAlso>
_:loc

_:loc
foaf:page
"http://www.example.com/mophor#me"

Does this reasoning make sense?

Regards
Rikkert Koppes (mophor)



Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
> (If this conversation is continued, it should be done on 
> semantic-web@w3.org
> not this old list.)
> 
> Tim BL
> 
> On 2007-06 -06, at 09:45, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On 2007-06 -06, at 09:02, Lynn, James (Software Escalations) wrote:
>>
>>> But then does the same restriction apply to fragment identifiers? In
>>> other words if a server returns a fragment for
>>> http://www.example.com/mophor#me
>>
>> The server doesn't see http://www.example.com/mophor#me.
>>
>> "http://www.example.com/mophor#me"   means "The defined by local 
>> identifier 'me' in the document 'http://www.example.com/mophor#me' "
>>
>> This is the web architecture.   The client strips off the '#me'  and 
>> acceses the dcoument
>> <http://www.example.com/mophor> (if it hasn't already for some other 
>> id in the same document).
>> The server sends back a document telling it about 
>> <http://www.example.com/mophor#me> and maybe other things.
>>
>>> is it unacceptable to use it as a URI
>>> for oneself?
>>
>> It is very acceptable to use "http://www.example.com/mophor#me" as a 
>> URI for oneself.
>> Recomended, in fact.  You should have one.
>>
>> Mine is http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#i
>>
>> Actually if I did it againt I would have made it
>> http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#TBL
>>
>> makes it a bit clearer.
>>
>> Tim BL
>>
> 
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2007 17:11:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:57 UTC