Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle

On 14 June 2011 10:49, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote:
> On 13 Jun 2011, at 20:51, David Booth wrote:
>>> <http://richard.cyganiak.de/>
>>>    a foaf:Document;
>>>    dc:title "Richard Cyganiak's homepage";
>>>    a foaf:Person;
>>>    foaf:name "Richard Cyganiak";
>>>    owl:sameAs <http://twitter.com/cygri>;
>>>    .
>>
>> That should be fine for applications that do not need to distinguish
>> between foaf:Documents and foaf:Persons . . . which is a large class of
>> applications.  OTOH, there *are* applications that need to distinguish
>> between foaf:Documents and foaf:Persons.  *Those* applications will need
>> to apply disambiguation techniques, and some of their owners will
>> (wrongly) blame you for the perceived "extra" work it causes them --
>> "extra" only because they happen to be implementing a different class of
>> application than your data best supports.
>
> Yes, good analysis.

Not sure I'm comfortable with the notion of data being published with
a predetermined class of consuming applications. The bottom lines are:
publish what you want, interpret how you see fit. Somewhere between
Postel and Aleister Crowley.

My comments on httpRange-14 could not be any less relevant to the
reality, I'd just rather things were kinda tidy rather than swept
under the carpet (at home I have dog fur on the tiles). Yes, I do
think if we can have some approximation of a consistent common model,
that is better for communication. But it's pretty much a certainty
that the best course of action is to live with whatever comes up and
make the best of it. Build on what we can. Cue cliche "if history has
taught us anything..."

Cheers,
Danny.

-- 
http://danny.ayers.name

Received on Thursday, 16 June 2011 00:14:56 UTC