W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > July 2009

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

From: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 16:56:44 +1000
Message-ID: <a1be7e0e0907082356g5a580976x67843a81884d9408@mail.gmail.com>
To: Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>
Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
2009/7/9 Juan Sequeda <juanfederico@gmail.com>:
> On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> Could you explain why???

Does it seem reasonable to have to trawl through millions (or
billions) of RDF triples resolved from a large database that only used
one base URI with fragment identifiers for everything else if you
don't need to considering that 100 specific RDF triples in a compact
document might have been all you needed to see?

Peter
Received on Thursday, 9 July 2009 07:08:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:20:50 UTC