- From: Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org>
- Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 18:24:15 +0100
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Linking Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>
> > RDFa will not generally negate the essential separation of Name (via > URI.URN-URL) and Address (via URI.URL) since Linked Data oriented triples > will still contain de-referencable URIs :-) if you can put the RDF and the human legible HTML version in the same address there is absolutely no reason to have separate resources. If you really want to make it clear that "its not an informative resource" (its not like up to today we had any evidence of this being practically useful or enabling so far, matter of fact there are evidences of the contrary [1]) then just say that in the RDF <thisuri> <isnot> <aninformativeresource> :-) gone with content negotiation, gone with multiple URI URN URL and distinctions among them. I hope we can agree on the principle of keeping things absolutely as easy as possible, as the only way to win (back..) interest from the actual web development circles and have adoption Giovanni [1] http://google-code-updates.blogspot.com/2008/02/urls-are-people-too.html
Received on Monday, 4 May 2009 17:25:14 UTC