Re: Explaining the benefits of http-range14 (was Re: [HTTP-range-14] Hyperthing: Semantic Web URI Validator (303, 301, 302, 307 and hash URIs) )

On 10/21/11 10:53 AM, David Booth wrote:
> Right, though I would call it an application issue rather than an
> interoperability issue, because whether or not it is important to
> distinguish the two depends entirely on the application.
> Ambiguity/unambiguity should not be viewed as an absolute, but as
> *relative*  to a particular application or class of applications: a URI
> that is completely unambiguous to one application may be hopelessly
> ambiguous to a different application that requires finer distinctions.
> See "Resource Identity and Semantic Extensions: Making Sense of
> Ambiguity"
> http://dbooth.org/2010/ambiguity/paper.html
+1

Examples of different applications/services where the above applies:

1. World Wide Web -- as a global information space.
2. World Wide Web -- as a global data space.
3. World Wide Web -- as a global knowledge space.

httpRange-14 enables Web users straddle the items above without 
consequence. The hyperlink is still the driver of application experience.
>> >  
>> >  The question of how many URIs you need has almost nothing to do with
>> >  httpRange-14. It would arise no matter how you ended up choosing
>> >  between direct vs. indirect.
> +1.  With or without httpRange-14, there will always be URIs that are
> unambiguous to some applications and ambiguous to others.  This is the
> inescapable consequence of the fact that, for the most part, it is
> impossible to define anything completely unambiguously -- a principle
> well discussed and established in philosophy.

+1


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen