W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2006

RE: CURIEs: A proposal

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 11:02:57 -0400
To: Misha Wolf <Misha.Wolf@reuters.com>
Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org, semantic-web@w3.org, www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFF2E97D8A.655AB393-ON85257196.00522D72-85257196.0052ABAE@lotus.com>

Misha Wolf writes:

> 7f  whether the IRI mapped to the prefix is required to be 
dereferenceable.

I'm not sure I'd put it this way, as I think it's a matter of degree 
rather than "whether".  Specifically:

* I believe that, by definition, any http URI is dereferenceable, in the 
sense that it is always appropriate to try a GET, except perhaps if your 
intentions are malicious (denial of service, etc.)  Thus, for example, 
it's always OK for a crawler to attempt a GET or HEAD on an http URI that 
it stumbles upon or cobbles up.

* The TAG has stated that it's always good practice for the authority to 
cause representations to be available.  Now, here's where I think it's a 
matter of degree.  I can imagine circumstances in which, notwithstanding 
the TAG's general advice, one would go the other way.  If, for example, a 
namespace were minted deep in the heart of some system, for uses really 
internal to that system, and from context we knew that it would be used 
for one or two documents of short lifetime and never again, well maybe 
then it's not worth the deployment cost of responding to GET requests. 
Still, it's a good thing at least in principle, so that if the crawler 
comes along, it gets a reasonable description.

So, I think the IRI mapped to the prefix is by definition dereferenceable 
(if in the http scheme) in the sense that you can always try, and that 
resource authorities SHOULD in most cases offer a representation.   There 
is some wiggle room between that SHOULD and a MUST.

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 23 June 2006 15:03:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:41 GMT