- From: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 01:25:54 +0100
- To: Toby A Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, Seth Russell <russell.seth@gmail.com>
- CC: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
On 09/07/2009 00:38, "Toby A Inkster" <tai@g5n.co.uk> wrote: > On 8 Jul 2009, at 19:58, Seth Russell wrote: > >> Is it not true that everything past the hash (#alice) is not >> transmitted back to the server when a browser clicks on a >> hyperlink ? If that is true, then the server would not be able to >> serve anything different if a browser clicked upon http:// >> example.com/foaf.rdf or if they clicked upon http://example.com/ >> foaf.rdf#alice . > > Indeed - the server doesn't see the fragment. > >> If that is true, and it probably isn't, then is not the Semantic >> Web crippled from using that techniqe to distinguish between >> resources and at the same time hyper linking between those >> different resources? > > > Not at all. > > Is the web of documents crippled because the server can't distinguish > between requests for http://example.com/document.html and http:// > example.com/document.html#part2 ? Of course it isn't - the server > doesn't need to distinguish between them - it serves up the same web > page either way and lets the user agent distinguish. > > Hash URIs are very valuable in linked data, precisely *because* they > can't be directly requested from a server - they allow us to bypass > the whole HTTP 303 issue. Mind you, it does mean that you should make sure that you don't put too many LD URIs in one document. If dbpedia decided to represent all the RDF in one document, and then use hash URIs, it would be somewhat problematic. > > -- > Toby A Inkster > <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> > <http://tobyinkster.co.uk> > > >
Received on Thursday, 9 July 2009 00:27:01 UTC