- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:41:26 +0100
- To: Bernhard Schandl <bernhard.schandl@univie.ac.at>
- Cc: Angelo Veltens <angelo.veltens@online.de>, public-lod@w3.org
On 1 Jun 2010, at 19:37, Bernhard Schandl wrote: > I want to throw in another question, are there currently arguments > for or against the two alternatives: > > http://www.example.org/doc/alice.html > > vs > > http://www.example.org/doc/html/alice > > and the same for .rdf vs rdf/ In terms of web architecture both options are the same. But the first one has several “soft” advantages: - more idiomatic and hence easier to remember and use - more compatible with the Hierarchical URIs pattern [1] - yields an obvious URI for the generic, format-independent version of the resource (chop off the extension) Best, Richard [1] http://patterns.dataincubator.org/book/hierarchical-uris.html > > Best > Bernhard > >
Received on Wednesday, 2 June 2010 10:42:04 UTC