Re: Selectors as URIs?

Yes, sorry, I was too brief.

Clearly, as the fragment is not passed to the server, it cannot take it
into account when performing the redirect.  Thus, if the representation is
multiple resources, the only thing that the server can do is to redirect to
the top level resource without taking into account what the URI actually
identifies, where the fragment is at best meaningless and at worst
incorrect.

Secondly, as DOIs can redirect to any representation, and fragments are
tied to representation formats, to say that it's passed through (like in
Stian's example) is actually the same situation with the possibility of it
being correct.  Perhaps the fragment identifier in the HTML representation
triggers unexpected behavior in a different format's representation, or
perhaps it ends up stuck on a paywall or on a javascript redirect.
Consider Appendix B of Jeni's document where SVG alone can have three
different interpretations for the same fragment identifier :(

All to say ... relying on fragments for the description of a segment of
interest is going to be unreliable compared to just describing it as best
you can, and allowing consuming systems to robustly find the region of
interest.

Rob


On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Eamonn Neylon <Eamonn.Neylon@bsigroup.com>
wrote:

> Rob
>
> That's not how http clients work. If a fragment is attached to a URL it is
> not sent by the client as part of the resource request. Rather, the
> fragment is removed from the request by the client, and is then used once
> the response is returned to locate the relevant section within the
> resource. So use of fragments is entirely client-side and survives any
> redirection performed in obtaining the resource. This architecture of the
> web thus provides robustness both for moved resources and malformed
> fragment locators.
>
> Regards
>
> Eamonn
>
> Eamonn Neylon
> Consultant, SignalArc
> ________________________________________
> From: Robert Sanderson [azaroth42@gmail.com]
> Sent: 13 April 2015 17:30
> To: Robert Bolick
> Cc: Ivan Herman; Paolo Ciccarese; W3C Public Annotation List; Bill
> Kasdorf; Tzviya Siegman; Markus Gylling
> Subject: Re: Selectors as URIs?
>
> Which, to expand slightly, doesn't work as the DOI HTTP handler redirects
> to another URI without that fragment, losing the semantics of the original
> URI.
>
> Rob
>
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Robert Bolick <robert.bolick@gmail.com
> <mailto:robert.bolick@gmail.com>> wrote:
> You mean like attaching it to the tail end of a DOI (which many EPUBs and
> other  online content objects have)? 😁
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 13 Apr 2015, at 17:10, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org<mailto:ivan@w3.org>>
> wrote:
> >
> > (Although this may not be immediately relevant to the Working Group
> right now, I think the question *may* become relevant, hence my copy to it…)
> >
> > Rob, Paolo,
> >
> > a question came up at the Digital Publishing IG today. The IG is looking
> at general fragment identifiers for the purpose of identifying portions
> within a digital document (typically EPUB, but also some future versions of
> it). The Selector structure of the OA obviously gives a great model for
> various types of anchors, mainly when combined with other, existing
> fragment id definitions.
> >
> > However, at present, the selectors are defined in terms of RDF
> resources; to take an example from the spec, it says, for example
> >
> > selector": {
> >      "@id": "http://example.org/selector1",
> >      "@type": "oa:DataPositionSelector",
> >      "start": 4096,
> >      "end": 4104
> > }
> >
> > To be usable for a fragment identification, this structure should be
> turned into some sort of a, well, URI fragment. I mean, it is probably
> relatively easy to do this, something like
> >
> >
> http://www.example.org/#selector(type=DataPositionSelector,start=4096,end=4104)
> >
> > would do it but, of course, the ideal would be if that type of fragment
> format would be defined at one place.
> >
> > The question is: has this ever been discussed previously on the OA
> model? If it hasn't been done, should it be done? If it should be done,
> should it be done by this WG, or some other group?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Ivan
> >
> >
> > ----
> > Ivan Herman, W3C
> > Digital Publishing Activity Lead
> > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> > mobile: +31-641044153<tel:%2B31-641044153>
> > ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Rob Sanderson
> Information Standards Advocate
> Digital Library Systems and Services
> Stanford, CA 94305
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Visit the BSI website at www.bsigroup.com
>
> This email may contain confidential information and/or copyright
> material. This email is intended for the use of the addressee only.
> Any unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you receive this email
> by mistake, please advise the sender immediately by using the
> reply facility in your email software.
>
> The British Standards Institution is incorporated by Royal Charter.
>
> This email has been scanned for all known viruses.
>



-- 
Rob Sanderson
Information Standards Advocate
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305