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

Re: Cool URIs for the Semantic Web

From: Giovanni Tummarello <g.tummarello@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 19:05:14 +0000
Message-ID: <210271540703061105m12dc97jd600acb21dde9f7b@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Richard Cyganiak" <richard@cyganiak.de>
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org

Hi there,

no dubt there has been some flames, i'll read those laters, i still
ask that the original page be more open to external contributions and
comments.

> The article is not meant to be an overview or comparison of several
> approaches. It presents the approach that we (Leo, Max and I) think
> is best. It is biased -- towards using existing Web standards
> wherever possible.

its really not the impression i get from the abstract, which speaks
about generic URI and comparison of tecniquest etc.  :-)

Please note i understand the enthusiasm and the drive to make "strong
statements" on the SW. By making a strong statement there is actual
hope that they somehow gather enough attention to somehow... become
real.  and we want it to become real!! :-)

But the matter is really open still and there are no clear winner (if
there'll ever be) so i was proposing to increase consensus on that
very document..


> limitation: You can't put them into your browser or cURL or your
> favourite programming language's URL.open() function or any other
> place that resolves URIs and expect it to return something useful. We
> think this matters.

For entities which are conceptually specific to another entity which
has a strong mapping with a DNS entry this can be ok. (e.g. nokia
phone model bla bla). But then again, even in this case, would a nokia
engineer have use for the same information that would be shown to a
teen browing nokia website?

It seems to me this is a cool hack for SW demostrators but.. anyway
cool hacks might in fact really help the sw in general so :-)

> risks (account theft etc), but we wouldn't have twenty years of
> experience dealing with it.

No its experience the issue, its the inherent principle.
If I die, g1o.net will expire next year. My uri/url will be then
resolved by a spammer (they have automatic registration procedures for
expiring domains)
nobody uses the semantic web today right? so this is not a big deal
(although it is already disturbig at times.. ) l
can you forsee what this would mean tomorrow if the SW gets really in
use? (and if you use URLs no only for nice human reppresentations but
also as in the linked data approach)
hard to say

>

> Yes, I can't disagree, domain-specific solutions can be better. Think
> of our one-size-fits-all approach as a default solution that works
> reasonably well across domains, and should be used in the absence of
> an existing better solution for your specific domain or application.

Most definitely, but it would be good to consider the thing at 360
degrees to accept all the implications.
An unbiased overview could help :-)

>
> > To conclude.. what about making it a wiki page?
>
> I'd rather read separate, self-contained, concise and well-argued
> cases for using the other approaches.
>

Maybe a wiki page for the identification workshop could do this. Will
check with the others.

Ciao ciao :-)
Giovanni
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2007 19:05:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:55 UTC