- From: Christopher Gutteridge <cjg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 09:59:11 +0100
- CC: public-lod@w3.org
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|001cad6e23d0fb5b442060ba51f4d91dn5C9xI03cjg|ecs.soton.ac.uk|4DF5D15F.1030>
Before I comment, I just want to summarise my understanding because http-range-14 is a weird term; I understand it as the range-14 issue that when you use 302 to redirect from a URI-A to a URL-B we have a convention that URL-B has some relationship to URI-A but it's not defined, we don't treat this as semantic information and tend to throw it away. (stated to make sure I've understood correctly) This bit a chap working with some of my data; * he loaded some data from <URI-A> using a library * URI-A did a nice content-negotiated 302 to URL-B (and RDF document) * URL-B had a description of <URI-A> * The problem was he also wanted to auto extract the license for this data, but the triples gave the license as a relation to <URL-B>, but the system treated the data as loaded from <URI-A> At the most simple level, we could add some triples when loading a graph via redirection... <URI-A> myprefix:http302redirect <URL-B> or something richer with dates, http options etc. You could do something even fussier with http headers stating an explicit relationship with the 302, but all of this is very nice but the main problem seems to be that it's hard and doesn't benefit someone who just wants to knock something up quickly. The real problem seems to me that making resolvable, HTTP URIs for real world things was a clever but dirty hack and does not make any semantic sense. We should use thing://data.totl.net/scooby to refer to the dog and have a convention that http://data.totl.net/scooby will refer to some content about my dog. This URL can of course then content negotiate as normal. You could also use this in reverse. *thing*://www.imdb.com/title/tt0910554/ is the primary topic of http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0910554/ Yes, you could end up with a whole bunch of URIs for the same thing; thing://data.totl.net/scooby thing://data.totl.net/scooby.html thing://data.totl.net/scooby.pdf thing://data.totl.net/scooby.csv all are the same thing, but big deal. The only tricky thing would be people may get confused about the "thing" URI related to a document. For example, given a document in pdf, word and html, you might need a separate thing:// URI to describe the abstract concept of the document, but that's not the primary topic of any of the documents. Such fiddling details are more the province of people with experience, so I'm not too worried. What we should be doing is making the common garden data really easy to produce. I've spent a lot of time trying to teach these concepts to people at hackdays & barcamps, plus in a professional context. http:// URIs for real world things clearly make it harder to learn. The follow-you-nose gimick is cool, but we could do that with a change convention, and a trivial update to existing libraries (just resolve thing:// via http://) I expect the answer is "it's too late to change now". To which I am tempted to say "change or die". (again, another Monday morning ranty mail! but I feel like someone should be commenting on the emperors URI convention. If there's a cheat sheet I should read before continuing commenting on these subject, please point me to it.) Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 6/13/11 1:28 AM, Pat Hayes wrote: >> But I don't think all this is really germane to the http-range-14 >> issue. The point there is, does the URI refer to something like a >> representation (information resource, website, document, RDF graph, >> whatever) or something which definitely canNOT be sent over a wire? > > The Referent of a URI re., http-range-14 is the observation (or > description) subject. In this context the subject may or may not be a > real world object or entity. > > In the context of Linked Data, the observation (or description) > subject URI resolves to a Representation of its Referent. Actual > representation is accessible via an Address. Data representation > formats are *optionally* negotiable e.g., via content negotiation, and > ultimately varied i.e., many serialization formats for byte stream > that actually transmits data from its source to its consumers. > > -- Christopher Gutteridge -- http://id.ecs.soton.ac.uk/person/1248 You should read the ECS Web Team blog: http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/webteam/
Received on Monday, 13 June 2011 08:59:43 UTC