W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2007

Re: article on URIs, is this material that can be used by the SWEO IG?

From: Ed Davies <edavies@nildram.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 17:17:00 +0100
Message-ID: <4666DDFC.40607@nildram.co.uk>
To: Marc de Graauw <marc@marcdegraauw.com>
CC: www-tag@w3.org

Marc de Graauw wrote:
> Not quite.
> 
> If
> http://example.com/ontology/meter
> http://example.com/ontology/kilogram
> http://example.com/ontology/watt
> all 303 to the same information resource, they still identify three
> different resources, namely the meter, the kilogram and the Watt.

Agreed. (Except, pedantically, that the unit of power is spelt
"watt", not "Watt".)

> What exactly the 303 points to isn't essential for using the URI to identify
> a (non-information) resource, 

Also agreed.

> likewise what the document a
> <subjectIndicatorRef> points to contains isn't essential either. It may
> contain sensible stuff, or nonsense, but this wouldn't change the fact that
> http://example.com/ontology/meter is used as an identifier for the meter. 

OK, I agree with this now.  I misinterpreted your original
sentence:

> So, tweaking the Topic Map definitions a bit, it would 
> be fair to say a 303 response means the dereferenced URI
> is a  subject indicator ...

to mean that the destination of the 303 was the subject
indicator but, on reflection, I see that doesn't make
sense and you meant the URI which was being dereferenced,
not the URI obtained by dereferencing.

I'm far from convinced that subjectIndicatorRef is a
helpful way to think about 303, though.  303 shouldn't be
telling you anything you don't already know about the
level of indirection of a URI (RDF only ever allows one
level; topic maps, to the small extent I understand them,
allow two different levels).

Ed Davies.
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2007 16:17:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:52 UTC