- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 12:13:12 -0400
- To: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Cc: Jonathan A Rees <rees@mumble.net>, public-lod community <public-lod@w3.org>, Leigh Dodds <leigh@ldodds.com>, Dave Reynolds <dave@epimorphics.com>, Ian Davis <me@iandavis.com>
On 2012-03 -23, at 21:02, Jeni Tennison wrote: > > On 23 Mar 2012, at 22:42, Jonathan A Rees wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> wrote: >> >>> While there are instances of linked data websites using 303 redirections, there are also many examples of people making statements about URIs (particularly using HTML link relations, RDFa, microdata, and microformats) where those statements indicate that the URI is supposed to identify a non-information resource such as a Person or Book. >> >> Can you provide a handful of these Doing It Wrong URIs please from >> various sites? I think it would really be helpful to have them on hand >> during discussions. > > > OK. These picked up from dumps made available by webdatacommons.org, so very grateful to them for making that available; it can be quite hard to locate this kind of markup generally. Also I've used Gregg's distiller [1] to extract the RDFa out of the documents to double-check. > > > http://www.logosportswear.com/product/1531 > -> 301 > -> http://www.logosportswear.com/product/1531/harbor-cruise-boat-tote > > which contains the RDFa statement > > <http://www.logosportswear.com/product/1531> > a <http://rdf.data-vocabulary.org/#Product> ; > . > > The URI is intended to identify a product, not a web page. > Indeed, and notice that it has a different URI from the web page The 301 could be easily changed to a 303, and all would be happy. They have done the difficult bit of separating out the product and the page. A site, by the way, which uses 301 is saying that the URI you asked for is obsolete, and you should stop using it. Tim
Received on Sunday, 25 March 2012 16:13:22 UTC