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

Re: ungetable http URIs

From: David R. Karger <karger@theory.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 14:13:23 -0500
Message-Id: <200312041913.hB4JDN4q030600@harrier.csail.mit.edu>
To: matsakis@mit.edu
Cc: stefano@apache.org, www-rdf-dspace@w3.org


I wouldn't restrict "gettability" to things with bits.  And even if
the thing is bits, I wouldn't _require_ that GETs return those bits.
I would be satisfied if all gettable URLs provided _some useful_
information about the named object, without worrying whether it is
complete.

   X-Original-To: www-rdf-dspace@frink.w3.org
   Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 12:16:40 -0500 (EST)
   From: Nick Matsakis <matsakis@mit.edu>
   X-X-Sender: matsakis@artoo.ai.mit.edu
   Cc: SIMILE public list <www-rdf-dspace@w3.org>
   X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/Pine.OSX.4.56.0312011214060.5893@artoo.ai.mit.edu
   X-Mailing-List: <www-rdf-dspace@w3.org> archive/latest/832
   X-Loop: www-rdf-dspace@w3.org
   X-LocalTest: Local Origin



   On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

   > If I got to vote, I would vote +1 for "getable" URIs because I think
   > that they don't add complexity, they are consistent with the general
   > XML movement, and they are potentially more valuable in the future.

   If I got to vote, I would say 'getable' URIs should be assigned to things
   that can be expressed as bits, or things that are elements of RDF schemas
   (e.g. if you come across something with an RDF type you don't recognize,
   it would be nice if there was a schema saying something that type at a
   conveniently retrivable URL).

   I think things that don't meet those requirements should get ungetable
   URIs.

   Nick
Received on Thursday, 4 December 2003 14:13:25 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Thursday, 4 December 2003 14:13:27 EST