- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 16:17:13 +0100
- To: public-lod@w3.org
+1 The namespaces for our vocabularies, for example, are all http - but the transport mechanism may be https (and w3.org will upgrade requests to http for clients that support it). Phil On 27/04/2017 15:57, Stephane Fellah wrote: > Please keep in mind that in the context of Linked Data, the use of HTTP > scheme in URI is just fine and actually recommended, as URI should be > considered only as globally unique names identifying a concept. Naming and > addressing are two different things. Here the excellent blog for Norman > Walsh that explains the difference. > https://norman.walsh.name/2006/07/25/namesAndAddresses. > > Regards > Stephane Fellah > > > > > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Marcel Fröhlich <marcel.frohlich@gmail.com >> wrote: > >> Instead of policing a refined design could help (for use cases that are >> worth the additional effort) >> >> - As unique identifiers URNs may be cooler than URIs because they don't >> mix up naming and access protocol. >> Expect more protocol changes/variety to come than just a switch from >> HTTP to HTTPS, even if it takes some time. >> >> - Vanilla DNS is a mediocre base for URI namespaces, because DNS >> governance allows re-assignment of domains. >> We need top-level domains that assign domain names only once. >> >> Marcel >> >> 2017-04-27 15:43 GMT+02:00 Keith Alexander <keithalexander@ >> keithalexander.co.uk>: >> >>> When a naming system requires names to be maintained by an owner at cost >>> (domain renewals, server provision, etc), it's very likely that names are >>> going to change and fall out of use a lot... >>> >>> "Policing" (via pedantic-web or otherwise) may be useful for accidental >>> name changes, but otherwise hints at a conflict of interests between >>> publisher and consumer (ie, the consumer wants the old name, the publisher >>> wants the new one or wants to stop supporting the name altogether). >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Are "cool URIs don't change" for life? >>>> >>>> Would the policing of this fall under the jurisdiction of pedantic-web? >>>> >>>> Discuss. >>>> >>>> Aside: Please help me decide on this burning issue that I've been >>>> putting off: https://twitter.com/csarven/status/857569335908454401 >>>> >>>> -Sarven >>>> http://csarven.ca/#i >>>> >>>> >>> >> > -- Phil Archer Data Strategist, W3C http://www.w3.org/ http://philarcher.org +44 (0)7887 767755 @philarcher1
Received on Thursday, 27 April 2017 15:17:06 UTC