Re: relative URIs in examples

Perhaps the way to do this is to add the HTTP request into the statement

On 14 Jan 2013, at 13:24, Steve Speicher <sspeiche@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 6:40 AM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
>> I think all examples are using full URIs when relative ones
>> would do. E.g Example 1.
>> 
>> [[
>> # The following is the representation of
>> #    http://example.org/container1
>> @prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/>.
>> @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>.
>> @prefix ldp: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#>.
>> 
>> <http://example.org/container1>
>>   a ldp:Container;
>>   dcterms:title "A very simple container";
>>   rdfs:member
>>      <http://example.org/container1/member1>,
>>      <http://example.org/container1/member2>,
>>      <http://example.org/container1/member3>.
>> ]]
>> 
>> This would be  better written as
>> 
>> [[
>> # The following is the representation of
>> #    http://example.org/container1
>> @prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/>.
>> @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>.
>> @prefix ldp: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#>.
>> 
>> <> a ldp:Container;
>>   dcterms:title "A very simple container";
>>   rdfs:member <member1>, <member2>, <member3> .
>> ]]
>> 
>> This was in fact decided as part of ISSUE-29 "Relative URIs
>> are crucial" and it is Action-30 for Steve Speicher.
>> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/30
>> 
>> But I just thought I'd nudge this one as I noticed it.
>> 
> 
> Thanks for the help.  I wonder though if this standalone Turtle (as it
> sits in the spec) would be best with absolute URIs, perhaps at least
> the container URI.  Some readers may loose the context (unless you
> feel the comment and the other surrounding text set it appropriately).
> The action was to include additional examples with relative URIs,
> I'll look at it more.

The way to do that I think is to make it very clear what resource the
request is made on. Currently that is hidden in the # comment,
so one would need to bring that out.

The current non relative URIs make it also very difficult to read, 
because it is less clear who the document is that is being returned
is saying, and there is a lot of repetition. 

the use of <> makes it crystal clear what the document is, the way
giving the full URL for the document does not.


Henry

PS. For the philosophical background on this in terms of indexicals you may 
look at Elizabeth Anscombe's famous 1975 article "The First Person"
 http://mind.ucsd.edu/syllabi/01-02/270/pwd01F270/anscombe.html
And the literature on de-se attitudes.
Chrisopher Peacocke's most recent contribution to the debate in his recent 4 set of talks
at University College London "Self and Self-Representation"
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/itunes-u/self-self-representation-video/id418892016



> 
>> Henry
>> 
>> A short message from my sponsors: Vive la France!
>> Social Web Architect
>> http://bblfish.net/
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> - Steve

A short message from my sponsors: Vive la France!
Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/