- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:48:25 -0400
- To: public-lod@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4E98BC39.8080601@openlinksw.com>
On 10/14/11 6:22 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >> >> > ** Note intending to be rude or inflammatory etc.. ** Meant to say: ** NOT intending to be rude or inflammatory etc.. ** Could I rephrase your statement for sake of clarity, due to context: "Users in older browsers are going to see (and copy and paste) one set of *URLs* whilst users of Linked Data or URI abstraction aware browsers are going to see (and copy and paste) another" > > So you end up exposing two sets of URIs to the web and to Google et > al. Google only consolidates page rank for inbound links on 301s (and > not 302s or 303s) so you'd end up throwing your findability away for > an esoteric distinction that no-one quite understands. Or understands > but doesn't quite agree with :-) > Yes, basically, this is about putting the proverbial cart before the horse. A UX for handling resource locators (URLs i.e., a specific kind of URI) is now being used to handle URIs in a generic sense, courtesy of indirection. > > For now cross browser support for pushState and replaceState is pretty > shonky [1]. It's useful when product managers demand an "app like > experience" because you can do all the shiny ajax stuff without nasty > ajax #s and it all looks good on their iDevices. They don't need to > know that's not what most people see :-) > > With apologies for bringing up S*E*O on a Friday evening. And that > aside it just feels like asking people to add more complexity to > sidestep existing complexity that they don't understand / see the need > for in the first place..... > > > [1] http://caniuse.com/#search=replaceState > +100 Especially as this ultimately impedes comprehension of the Web's evolution into a global data space of introspective resources (data objects that reflect a sense of self via their EAV/SPO pattern based structure, serializable across the wire in a variety of formats ). I posted a while back (a year or so) that in retrospect, when introducing DBpedia the flow *should* have been: 1. http://dbpedia.org/page/Linked_Data -- a bookmark friendly and familiar address (URL) of an HTML based resource that describes 'Linked Data' . 2. #1 unveils: http://dbpedia.org/resource/Linked_Data -- basically a de-referencable resource (object) name endowed with self reflection that's discernible from the retrieved resource hence the About: XYZ pattern in DBpedia's HTML pages. 3. http://dbpedia.org/resource/Linked_Data -- then surfaces as an alternative data access mechanism courtesy of indirection (which now has functional/usage context) delivered by URI abstraction; basically, you have a generic and extremely powerful data source name added to the mix. Browsers, with their current world views and associated UX patterns, are palatable with 1-3 above. People should leverage indirection when they have a clear sense of its existence and purpose. That (IMHO) helps reduce the riddle-like nature of Linked Data and the power of URI abstraction in general. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Friday, 14 October 2011 22:48:49 UTC