Re: Address Bar URI

On 20/10/2011 01:18, "Nathan" <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:

> Dave Reynolds wrote:
>> The problem, as I see it, is that developers start from the NIR but then
>> use web browsers to find their way round the data and then cut paste the
>> browser locations they find, thus ending up with IRs where they should
>> have had NIRs. 
> 
> Agree, you put that very nicely Dave.
> 
> Perhaps Michael nailed it when he mentioned separation of concerns, one
> could suggest that this is what happens when the data-tier has knowledge
> of the presentation-tier (i.e. punting the user to a view of the data,
> rather than the data directly). That itself is quite possibly the
> product of using a web browser as a data browser.
> 
> I think it's fair to say that nothing is going to clean up the mess, so
> perhaps it's just a case of looking at tooling to sanity check our data.
> 
> Hugh's javascript would make a fine bookmarklet, click it and it changes
> the URI in the "address bar" to the NIR URI rather than the IR URI
> (assuming a 1-1 relation that is).

<semi-serious-suggestion>

Whilst I'm failing to lurk as well as:
<link rel="alernate" href="/programmes/:programme.rdf"/>

is there room for:
<link rel="ting" href="/programmes/:programme#programme"/>

to expose the nir uri? Maybe with a bookmarklet / greasemonkey style script
to pull out the nir uri and display it to anyone interested. Maybe even
using replaceState on the address bar :-)

Maybe this already exists
</semi-serious-suggestion>
> 
> Further, surely it must be possible to create a tool which quickly
> sanity checked triples, almost like a semantic web version of Google's
> "did you mean?"
> 
> If you write:
> 
>   fbase:Italy owl:sameAs <http://dbpedia.org/page/Italy> .
> 
> Then any number of checks could be made, for example that the class of
> Country is distinct from the class of Document, perhaps even hooking in
> on the primaryTopic relation.
> 
> It's clear after all these years that people will publish data however
> they want, guidance will be ignored, and that humans make mistakes - so
> perhaps we should be relying on machine understanding of our data, to
> correct our very human mistakes. Wherever possible that is :)
> 
> Best,
> 
> Nathan


http://www.bbc.co.uk/
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.

Received on Thursday, 20 October 2011 09:34:34 UTC