W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-annotation@w3.org > August 2015

Re: [web-annotation] Dropping type from ... what?

From: Ivan Herman via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 10:45:59 +0000
To: public-annotation@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-136330579-1441017958-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@tkanai, this is a much larger issue. I am not saying that it is not a
 valid issue, on the contrary, but I believe it would deserve a 
separate discussion at some point.

The problem is:

* In RDF, you are right, a resource identifier is any URI (well, to be
 extremely pedantic, any IRI). So the ISBN urn is indeed an acceptable
 URI for the RDF resource, whether it is possible to dereference the 
URI or not
* In the Linked Data World, there is an emphasis on dereferencing. In 
other words, a ISBN urn would be frown upon and one would expect to 
use a resolver (if any) for the urn
* In a JSON world I believe the expectation may be closer to the 
Linked Data World. But I agree that, in some cases, the identifier is 
also necessary

I am not sure what the right approach is but it is probably something 
we should document somewhere.

Should we move this into a separate issue?

GitHub Notif of comment by iherman
Received on Monday, 31 August 2015 10:46:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:39 UTC