On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Pierre-Antoine Champin<swlists-040405@champin.net> wrote: > > However, some people will still be concerned about naming their resources > under a domain that is not theirs. That is not only a matter of > URI-prettiness, but also of relying on an external service, which may cease > to exist tomorrow. > I'm switching uridirector.praxisbridge.org[1] to optionally include accept headers in choosing a template. That should give people a quick low-effort[2] way to get up and running without having to warp their URIs to match a third party service (and without having to commit to using the service once another option is available) It seems pretty clear that people should (a) only mint URLs in domains the control and (b) maybe think about including a sub-domain in the URIs for specific data sets (and thereby get the power of the domain name system on their side when they need to move the data later on) Note that following (a) doesn't mean you need to run your own server, it's sufficient to just register the domain. Smart-ish redirectors (third party or local) will then allow you a lot of flexibility in choosing exactly where the data is located. -cks [1] Like purl o t-b-g, only with host name header recognition so you can CNAME your own domains over and maintain complete control over your URI, see previous email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2009Jul/0072.html It's not quite fully baked, but it's getting there. [2] You need to know what a CNAME is, and have access to your DNS configuration. But you're not minting URLs in domains you don't have administrative control over, are you? -- Christopher St. John cks@praxisbridge.com http://praxisbridge.com http://artofsystems.blogspot.comReceived on Thursday, 9 July 2009 18:43:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:20:50 UTC