- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 23:15:05 +0000
- To: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Hi Guys, Please do read over the following and let me know what you think - might be somewhat of a different approach -> [[[ Problem Statement and Background. The Web has long since provided names as a way of referring to things, from time to time the specification of these names has had to be revised, in order to match their usage on the Web as it evolves. With the rise of the Semantic Web, Media Fragments and Web Applications, the usage of these names, especially http names, has changed to become either inconsistent with the current URI specification or their usage is simply unspecified. A side effect of this new usage, is that various communities have differing opinions on just what a URI can or does refer to, and on how those URIs can be used. This leads to tensions between communities which are trying to converge, and in the worst case threatens the evolution of those communities and their respective technologies. The web communities using these URIs share two common requirements, they need to use absolute URIs to refer to network accessible resources, and they require some form of indirect referencing, frequently turning to fragment identifiers for this purpose. One of the most contended uses of URIs, is when they are used to refer to abstract concepts or things evoked by the processing of representations, for example: - A thing which is described within a representation, i.e. a person. - A particular application state or recomposable view provided by the application. - Some particular scene within a movie. Contentions are usually particularly high when a URI of the absolute-URI form is used for this purpose. In order to address this problem, it is suggested that a new class of Web Names is needed. A class which is disjoint with the current set of names (URIs/IRIs), fully compatible with those names, and which models existing naming conventions. Proposal - Web Names. Web Names provide a web friendly way of referring to things, each WebName is a 2-tuple comprising of a namespace and a name. WebName = ( namespace , name ) The namespace part of a WebName takes the syntactic form of an absolute-IRI, the namespace typically refers to a network accessible resource. Each namespace has an infinite pool of locally scoped references, within different contexts there often exists a need to expose one of those references, for example: - a reference to something which is described - a reference to a particular state or information view - a reference to a function or a variable - a reference to a particular time sequence and area within a video The name part of a WebName provides a way to expose these indirect references, the name can take the syntactic form of the primary-ref (an empty string) or a reference (a string consisting of one or more characters), the name provides an anchor to refer to things named within a namespace. WebNames have the following syntax: web-name = namespace local-name namespace = absolute-IRI local-name = [ "#" ] primary-ref / "#" reference primary-ref = 0<ipchar> reference = 1*( ipchar / "/" / "?" ) Since WebNames are 2-tuples and IRIs are strings, the value space of WebNames is completely disjoint with the value space of IRIs, however, the lexical form of each WebName is also a valid IRI, as such: IRI = http://example.com/foo/bar#baz1 \________________________/ \__/ | / WebName = ( namespace , name ) By sharing a lexical form which always produces a valid IRI, WebNames are fully compatible with the deployed web technologies, require no changes to be made, and are backwards compatible with existing IRIs which have been minted/used for the purpose of indirect referencing. Due to WebNames being 2-tuples, they cannot be dereferenced, this serves to null and void many of the most complicated and contentious issues outlined earlier, WebNames have been designed in such a way so that communities can opt-in to using them and focus on converging their technologies rather than trying to answer unanswerable questions. It is often the case that a network accessible resource is configured to provide information primarily about a single thing, for this purpose a WebName consisting of a namespace and a primary-ref can be used. When the name part of a WebName is the primary-ref, then the hash ("#") is optional, such that the WebName: ( "http://example.com/foo/bar" , "" ) can be specified using either of the following lexical forms: http://example.com/foo/bar# http://example.com/foo/bar and such that both those lexical forms encode the same WebName. ]]] Still needs work, especially on the text, but I think that's enough to get across what I'm proposing in the meantime. Thoughts and feedback more than appreciated. Best, Nathan
Received on Monday, 14 February 2011 23:17:34 UTC