W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2011

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle

From: Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 14:18:29 +0100
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=77U2QotBZGYBc76g3EdRWyYjqXA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Cc: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>, public-lod@w3.org
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org> wrote:
>
> On 2011-06 -17, at 08:51, Ian Davis wrote:
>
>>>> If you use HTTP 200 for something different, then
>>>> you break my ability to look at a page, review it, and then
>>>> express my review in RDF,  using the page's URI as the identifier.
>>>
>>> Not quite. It is saying that you can't give a review for my
>>> http://foobar.gov.uk/datasets/population web page because the RDF
>>> returned by the URI says it denotes a dataset not the web page. You can
>>> still review the dataset itself. You can review other web pages which
>>> don't return RDF data saying they are something other than a web page.
>>>
>>> [As an aside, I would claim that most reviews are in fact about things -
>>> restaurants, books, music - not about the web pages.]
>>>
>>
>> Quite. When a facebook user clicks the "Like" button on an IMDB page
>> they are expressing an opinion about the movie, not the page.
>
> BUT when the click a "Like" button on a blog they are expressing they like the
> blog, not the movie it is about.
>
> AND when they click "like" on a facebook comment they are
> saying they like the comment not the thing it is commenting on.
>
> And on Amazon people say "I found this review useful" to
> like the review on the product being reviewed, separately from
> rating the product.
> So there is a lot of use out there which involves people expressing
> stuff in general about the message not its subject.

Sure. All these use cases stand and can co-exist. I can look at the
data in any of those responses, or data I glean from elsewhere, to
figure out if the URI I'm accessing refers to the content I received
or the subject of that content. That model works for any protocol BTW.

>
> I am really not sure that I want to give up the ability in my browser
> to bookmark a page about something -- the IMDB page a
> about a movie, rather than the movie itself.
>

OK, we differ here then. I would prefer to bookmark the movie because
that's what I'm interested in. The page will change over the years but
the movie will still persist. Today you have no choice because your
conceptual model does not give a URI to the movie and doesn't see the
need to generate 2 URIs.


> When the cost os just fixing Microdata syntax to make it easy to
> say things about the subject of a page.

i don't think this has anything to do with microdata.

Ian
Received on Friday, 17 June 2011 13:18:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:21:13 UTC