W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > June 2018

Re: [dxwg] Profile negotiation [RPFN]

From: Ruben Verborgh <Ruben.Verborgh@UGent.be>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 15:45:10 +0000
To: Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov>
CC: "public-dxwg-wg@w3.org" <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <45582364-DD65-4AC6-8EC4-C7015CBCFEBC@ugent.be>
Hi Annette,

Obviously not Lars, but my two cents below :-)

> Can you explain the value that you see in having the same URL

So that we can link to the data, regardless of how it is represented.

I.e., for the same reason that we link to http://dbpedia.org/resource/Marie_Curie
instead of http://dbpedia.org/data/Marie_Curie.json
or http://dbpedia.org/page/Marie_Curie,
since the first URL can be used for clients of any kind,
whereas the two others are specific to certain types of client.

Furthermore, the first URL remains valid
if new representations are added in the future.

>  for both datasets?

Nitpick: you call them "both datasets", implying that they are different datasets.
While we probably shouldn't get too philosophical on what a dataset is and isn't,
but Lars described his case as:

>> data about the same entities (e. g. persons and geographic entities) but using two different metadata profiles.

so the dataset seemed the same.

> To me, that suggests that they are really two different resources;

Here I want to point out again that different representations A and B _are_ different resources.
However, Lars seems to imply that both A and B are representations of a dataset C.

The resource "the HTML version of X" is a different resource than "the JSON version of X";
however, both are representations of X.

So whether or not they are different resources (they are) does not seem the question here.


Received on Monday, 11 June 2018 15:48:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:04 UTC