- From: Paolo Ciccarese <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:44 -0500
- To: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
- Cc: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>, public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAFPX2kBoz4WrHevkaqXkO3xeW0ymJAqYsS5VOmJ_++uqeLrDhw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>wrote: > Hi Paolo, > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Paolo Ciccarese > <paolo.ciccarese@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > I agree that the current Tag solution is not ideal. And I also agree > that it > > is not good modeling but if I have a URI that returns an entry in a > database > > in HTML and I don't have an alternative URI for identifying that concept > I > > might use that rather than introducing another URI that nobody in the > > community would understand. > > Well, they could understand it by following through to the "Source" URI. > > > Question is: are we 110% sure it is not going to be a problem? > > In other words: > > I say > > ... oa:hasBody <http://omim.org/entry/104760> > > Where that's a document, and the intent is that it should be rendered as > HTML? > > > > <http://omim.org/entry/104760> a oa:Tag; > > Somebody else says only: > > ... oa:hasBody <http://omim.org/entry/104760> > > Where the intent is clear that it's a Tag, not a document. > > > > Now in the open world the second annotation is going to gain the Tag > nature. > > Again, we do not recommend the above behavior but it is very very common. > > Right. But ... the chances of other people using that URI as a > document that should be rendered? Yes it's possible, but seems > unlikely? And we don't recommend doing that, just the same as the home > page / person case. > The thing is that it is not unlikely. That is my fear. > > > > So how about recommending to do #tag on the URI of the page? > > Like: http://omim.org/entry/104760#tag > > Again, not ideal but it could help. No? > > This is what we recommend already, using a different URI and linking > it to the document :) > Wait, that is exactly my point. Not 'a different URI' in general, that would create a mess I believe. How do we feel in pushing for a specific way of using "the different URI" #something? This is common practice in the Drupal platform where they use #person after the URI of a profile HTML page to indicate the conceptual entity behind the profile. It seems WebIDs use #me http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/ Paolo
Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 18:23:11 UTC