- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 14:33:33 -0500
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- CC: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>, nathan@webr3.org, public-lod@w3.org
On 11/11/10 2:01 PM, Pat Hayes wrote: > On Nov 11, 2010, at 8:42 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > >> On 11/11/10 9:00 AM, David Booth wrote: >>> On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 07:23 +0100, Jiří Procházka wrote: >>> [ . . . ] >>>> I think it is flawed trying to enforce "URI == 1 thing" >>> Exactly right. The "URI == 1 thing" notion is myth #1 in "Resource >>> Identity and Semantic Extensions: Making Sense of Ambiguity": >>> http://dbooth.org/2010/ambiguity/paper.html#myth1 >>> It is a good *goal*, but it is inherently unachievable. >> Are you implying that a URI -- an Identifier -- doesn't have a Referent (singular)? If so, what is the URI identifying? >> >> In my world view: >> Identification != Representation. The fact that I can de-reference an Identifier en route to obtaining Data doesn't make the Identifier a Representation of the Data. > True. But the suggestion embodied in http-range-14 is that IF you get a 'normal' 200-coded access response, THEN we should all agree that the IRI does in fact refer to the data-thing it accesses. I agree. It's an Address, a URL, a Pointer. > And for all its awkwardness and wierdness, this does seem like a workable and useful convention. I think its like democracy: its stinks, but all other alternatives are worse. If we don't get a 200-coded access response, then it's something else, which opens up a slot for the request IRI being a Name (or even something else). 200 OK implies IRI in the Request is a URL (a Data Locator). Next step, user agent retrieves data from Location (exposed by Content-Location: header), in a format it understands, the application logic of said user agent then allows it to process the data using its own rules which may include flipping the Address to a Name and designating what was as exposed via Content-Location as the Data Address. All of this occurs for the sole purpose of keeping the Linked Data graph navigable by humans or machines. There are such a tiny handful of Linked Data tools, especially on the user agent side of things that I don't know why Ian's option is problematic, especially as it's an option, and it doesn't require a new HTTP response code. It gives user agents the option to disregard the 303 response since the data can speak for itself in a language the user agent is supposed to understand -- if it's Structured Linked Data aware. BTW - the democracy analogy is great, even though I don't think it stinks :-) Link: 1. http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/html/http/iandavis.com/2010/303/toucan -- description of a Toucan with Ian's tweak applied to the user agent 2. http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/describe/?url=http://iandavis.com/2010/303/toucan - another view of the description of a Toucan that takes you places . Kingsley >> It's a conduit to the Data. >> >> [SNIP] >> >> -- >> >> Regards, >> >> Kingsley Idehen >> President& CEO >> OpenLink Software >> Web: http://www.openlinksw.com >> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen >> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 > 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office > Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax > FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes > > > > > > > -- 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, 11 November 2010 19:34:06 UTC