- From: Tom Scott <tascott@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 23:50:02 +0100
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
On 19 Oct 2011, at 15:42, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > On 10/19/11 10:14 AM, David Wood wrote: >> On Oct 19, 2011, at 10:02, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >> >>> On 10/19/11 8:49 AM, Paul Wilton wrote: >>>> what is this IE6 that you talk about ? >>>> >>>> :) >>> Internet Explorer 6. The browser that still dominates market share across WWW end-users :-) >> >> ...with less than 5% market share as of last March [1]. Also, most of those reported instances of IE6 usage may be due to the AVG Linkscanner bot, which uses an IE6 ID string [2]. >> >> I know IE6 has been a thorn in our sides for years, but maybe it is time to let it go. > > We don't believe is forcing issues on end-users by disrupting them via actions such as: implementing a Linked Data URI style for something like DBpedia that works modulo IE 6. Yes, the market share of IE is decreasing (thank heavens!) but we still have a live usecase that showcases why slash style of URIs are important and useful. > > Kingsley Whatever the usage of IE6 in the general web population I can't believe that's reflective of dbpedia users. If it is then that might be the best indication of widespread LOD adoption and we all should therefore re-read Michael's comments. (meanwhile I'm going to check why my dad uses dbpedia and garner his feedback on the http-range-14 issue since he's the only person I know that uses IE6). > > >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> [1] http://www.sitepoint.com/ie6-usage-below-5-percent-browser-trends/ >> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers#Overestimation >> >> >>> >>> Kingsley >>>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Kingsley Idehen<kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: >>>>> On 10/18/11 1:49 PM, Jonathan Rees wrote: >>>>>> I'm not trying to be difficult, I just really don't get what you're >>>>>> saying. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> I believe the your quests was about a case for 303's. Which is >>>>>>>> basically >>>>>>>> another way of seeking a case for slash terminated URIs re. Linked >>>>>>>> Data >>>>>>>> deployment. >>>>>> Not exactly - I'm trying to build a case against hash URIs. >>>>> A case against hash URIs is that your deployment won't play well with IE 6. >>>>> The problem with IE 6 is that it sends # over the wire. Other browsers >>>>> don't. Thus, you (the publisher) has extra work on your hands should you >>>>> want your Linked Data deployment to cater to IE 6 users. This is why DBpedia >>>>> opted to use slash URIs since that meant a single set of re-write rules >>>>> without any exception oriented heuristics for IE 6 user agents. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Kingsley Idehen >>>>> President& CEO >>>>> OpenLink Software >>>>> Web: http://www.openlinksw.com >>>>> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen >>>>> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Kingsley Idehen >>> President& CEO >>> OpenLink Software >>> Web: http://www.openlinksw.com >>> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen >>> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > -- > > 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 Wednesday, 19 October 2011 22:50:35 UTC