- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 12:10:39 -0400
- To: Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org>
- CC: Ian Davis <me@iandavis.com>, public-lod <public-lod@w3.org>
On 11/4/10 11:21 AM, Giovanni Tummarello wrote: > Hi Ian > > no its not needed see this discussion > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2007Jul/0086.html > pointing to 203 406 or thers.. > > ..but a number of social community mechanisms will activate if you > bring this up, ranging from russian style "you're being antipatriotic > criticizing the existing status quo " to "..but its so deployed now" > and ".. you're distracting the community from other more important > issues ", none of this will make sense if analized by proper logical > means of course (e.g. by a proper IT manager in a proper company, paid > based on actual results). > > But the core of the matter really is : who cares. My educated guess > looking at Sindice flowing data is that everyday out of 100 new sites > on web of data 99.9 simply use RDFa which doesnt have this issue. > > choose how to publish yourself but here is another one. If you chose > NOT to use RDFa you will miss out on anything which will enhance the > user experience based on annotations. As an example see our entry in > the semantic web challange [1]. > > Giovanni > > [1] http://www.cs.vu.nl/~pmika/swc/submissions/swc2010_submission_19.pdf Giovanni, Could I paraphrase, if you don't mind? I think you are saying that the following distractions are irrelevant to the fundamental goals of Linked Data: 1. Apache capabilities 2. Apache access 3. Access to other Web Servers 4. RDF formats such as RDF/XML (which most see as being RDF) 5. SPARQL 6. Heuristics for Resolvable Names (303 and friends). If so, I agree totally! BTW - RDFa is unfortunately named since it conveys the misconception that its an RDF derivative when it isn't. I say this bearing that the rest of the world (modulo LOD and broader Semantic Web communities) continue to perceive RDF as "owl:sameAs" RDF/XML. Yes, RDFa lets you drop a descriptor (information resource) anywhere on the Web without breaking the fundamental essence of the Linked Data concept :-) Kingsley > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Ian Davis<me@iandavis.com> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> The subject of this email is the title of a blog post I wrote last >> night questioning whether we actually need to continue with the 303 >> redirect approach for Linked Data. My suggestion is that replacing it >> with a 200 is in practice harmless and that nothing actually breaks on >> the web. Please take a moment to read it if you are interested. >> >> http://iand.posterous.com/is-303-really-necessary >> >> Cheers, >> >> Ian >> >> > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Thursday, 4 November 2010 16:11:09 UTC