- From: James Leigh <james@3roundstones.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 13:55:39 -0500
- To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Hello, Please consider using a more general, well-known, indirect graph identification[1] URI pattern. The cases stated for requiring indirect graph identification are shared by the Linked Data community for indirect resource identification[2]. Linked Data is often mirrored for the purposes of creating visualizations of the data, merging some or all of the data with data from other sources and/or enhancing responsiveness to queries. For your convince, I have copied the indirect graph cases from rdf-update[1] below. * the naming authority associated with the URI of an RDF graph in a Graph Store is not the same as the server managing the identified RDF content * the naming authority is not available * the URI is not dereferencable (i.e., when dereferenced, it does not produce a RDF graph representation) Replacing "RDF graph" above with "RDF resource", the same cases are equally a challenge for managing RDF data in the Linked Data community. I propose that this working group consider using a more general URI pattern that could be equally applied to both RDF graph storage and RDF resource resolution. Such a general prefix should use a well known[3] path prefix to allow clients to infer the identified graph or resource without resolution. The request-URI below could be recognized by both clients and servers as identifying the graph with the identifier of "http://www.example.com/other/graph". GET /.well-known/alias;http%3A//www.example.com/other/graph HTTP/1.1 Host: example.com Accept: application/rdf+xml Thanks, James [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-http-rdf-update/#indirect-graph-identification [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/09/LinkedData/ledp2011_submission_10.pdf [3] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5785
Received on Monday, 28 November 2011 18:56:08 UTC