- From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 12:55:01 -0400
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>, "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Mar 20, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > If Aunt Tillie wants to participate in the Semantic Web as a > publisher, then she can simply deploy RDF documents that use hash > URIs. That's not (much) harder than deploying HTML. Aunt Tillie > doesn't need 303 redirects. Umm... I think this is off topic (not your fault, Richard) - 303 was only raised as a point of comparison. The issue is how difficult will it be for Aunt Tillie to provide document metadata (links, etc.), in those cases where that metadata can't or shouldn't live inside the document (representation?) itself. This question figures into willingness to admit any particular solution. As always I assume that a solution that works for metadata will work for descriptions of arbitrary things, which is why I am OK with saying "metadata" instead of "description". You are right that the non-document case is covered by # as well as 303, but that's not the challenging case in this discussion. Jonathan
Received on Thursday, 20 March 2008 16:56:36 UTC