Re: Change Proposal for HttpRange-14

On 3/27/12 11:17 AM, Michael Smethurst wrote:
> No sane publisher trying to handle a decent amount of traffic is gonna
> follow the dbpedia pattern of doing it in one step (conneg to 303) and
> picking up 2 server hits per request. I've said here before that the dbpedia
> publishing pattern is an anti-pattern and shouldn't be encouraged
Circa. 2006-2007, with Linked Data bootstrap via the LOD project as top 
priority, the goal was simple: unleash Linked Data in a manner that just 
worked. That meant catering for:

1. frameworks and libraries that send hash URIs over the wire
2. work with all browsers, no excuses.

Linked Data is now alive and in broad use (contrary to many 
misconceptions to the contrary), there is still a need for slash URIs. 
This isn't a matter of encouragement or discouragement, its a case of 
what works for the project goals at hand. If slash URIs don't work then 
use hash URIs or vice versa. Platforms that conform to Linked Data meme 
principles should be able to handle these scenarios.

BTW - Imagine a scenario where Linked Data only worked with one style of 
URI, where would we be today or tomorrow, re. Linked Data? Being 
dexterous and unobtrusive has to be a celebrated feature rather than a 
point of perpetual distraction.

As is always the case, a good system must pass the "horses for courses" 
test. Linked Data -- courtesy of the underlying architecture of the 
World Wide Web -- does that with aplomb modulo the "distraction star" 
wanderings of planet HttpRange-14 into its solar system every so many 
months :-)

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen