W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-dspace@w3.org > December 2003

RE: ungetable http URIs

From: Butler, Mark <Mark_Butler@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 18:28:19 -0000
Message-ID: <E864E95CB35C1C46B72FEA0626A2E8082062F4@0-mail-br1.hpl.hp.com>
To: SIMILE public list <www-rdf-dspace@w3.org>

Hi Andy

> Yes - we should be using gettable URLs where it makes sense.  
> Probably URNs for people.
> > So there are two possible
> > solutions:
> > a) Should we modify the XSLT stylesheet and re-run it to create the
> > Artstor 
> > data so that it uses URNs rather than URLs avoiding ungetable URIs?
> Not sure exactly what you mean here - "should not be using 
> ungetable URLs right" parses a double negative to to "use URLs" for me.

Is this better - "Should we modify the XSLT stylesheet and rerun it to
create the Artstor data so it uses URNs for all instance data?"

I think you didn't like my use of the term "instance data" before, so to
clarify this I mean assertional data, rather than terminological (schema)
data - what is your preferred term here?

I think we are agreed that terminological data should use URLs. 

> Gettablity refers to the ability to do a plain HTTP GET on 
> the URL and get
> something.  Joseki is providing explicit knowledge bases (KB) 
> on the web -
> within a KB, you can obtain information about any URI(ref).
> GET http://simileserver/artstore?lang=fetch&r=urn:foobar 
> will fetch the information with urn:foobar as subhect (and related
> information) from the artstore metadat located at
> http://simileserver/artstore There is no tie between the URL 
> for the KB and
> the URIs for the RDF in the KB (unless you want to do that).
> Joseki is not an infrastructure for placing meaningful 
> documents at URLs -
> you just need Apache for that.

Yes, understood.

However the problem with just using Apache is at the moment we have
approximately 34 files, all around 20 megabytes in size. So if we are to
expose each individual URL via Apache, then we potentially have a lot of
work to create the files that correspond to each URL, even if we use an
automated process as just dealing with collections this big is unwieldy. I'd
have a strong preference against doing this for the demo, because it seems
to me it' just make work - there's nothing at those URLs that's not in the
serialized data, right?

However if we can just feed that data into something else (like Joseki) and
that automatically generates the contents of the URL, then the make work
becomes less of an overhead, but I gather this will require changing the
URIs to be query strings as you describe above?

So perhaps the question I should be asking is for the purposes of the demo,
is there any advantage in using URLs for instance data rather than URNs, if
we assume that by making this decision now we are not committing to it long

kind regards, 

Dr Mark H. Butler
Research Scientist                HP Labs Bristol
Internet: http://www-uk.hpl.hp.com/people/marbut/
Received on Monday, 1 December 2003 13:29:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:13:09 UTC