- From: Seaborne, Andy <Andy_Seaborne@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 22:00:43 -0000
- To: "'karger@theory.lcs.mit.edu'" <karger@theory.lcs.mit.edu>, www-rdf-dspace@w3.org
David, > Alternatively (and this is the > approach I'd like to see) +1 I hope that we do plane to place information at the URLs so there is something GETtable, especially if the URI is a namespace in which case placing the vocabulary at that place would be good. One of the reasons I have been advocating placing our namespaces in our web palce is so we can place useful information at these points (the other reason is that we should presume on other people's web space). Andy > ----Original Message---- > From: David R. Karger <mailto:karger@theory.lcs.mit.edu> > Date: 18 November 2003 20:20 > > We were playing with some simile data in haystack today and discussed > briefly the fact that simile is defining URIs in namespace > http://www.mit.edu/simile/ that are not http-GETtable---ie, they > return 404 not founds. Apparently there has been some discussion of > this approach but I don't think I've weighed in. If we don't ever > plan for the URIs to be http-GETtable, there's no reason for us to > use http URIs: we could do urn://www.mit.edu/simile.... This would > avoid browsers getting confused. Alternatively (and this is the > approach I'd like to see) it would be nice if we had a web server > that returned some useful RDF when we tried to resolve such > URIs---just in case the requestor was able to cope with that (as > haystack can) > > -David
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2003 17:03:17 UTC