W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: ACTION-115: Note on proxy graph URI

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@ccf.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:45:33 -0400
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, "Kjetil Kjernsmo" <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>, "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C6F8D56D.CFBF%ogbujic@ccf.org>
Response to Kjetil / Andy re: proxies is below (I have made changes to the
editorial draft):

On 10/11/09 3:59 PM, "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com> wrote:
> I don't like the term proxy because:
> A/ (minor) "proxies" in HTTP occur in a lot of places so it's a bit overloaded
> B/ Having two names for the same thing is just something that happens on the
> web. Both names have the same status.
> It's the same graph, accessible through a different name.  Each name is as
> valid as the other and one is not a second class name; "proxy", for me, sort
> of implies it's not a first class name.

Ok.  I was using the term proxy to tease out whether we were talking about
URI 'aliases' or service endpoints for the purpose of clarity in the
protocol model.  It appears the use case we are talking about is that of an

In which case, I believe this settles the issue of whether this induces good
'HTTP behavior', since presumably you can use all the verbs
(PUT/POST/GET/DELETE) uniformly on these alias URIs as though you were using
the IRI of the graph directly. In addition, conditional GETs would work as

"Kjetil Kjernsmo" wrote
> So, it means it is a URI Alias. While that carries some negative connotation,
perhaps we should just use that term "endpoint URI alias", or something...?

Well (WRT the negative connotation of 'alias') - although Web arch generally
frowns on multiple URIs to identify the same resource it doesn't forbid it,
and it appears this use case is an exemplar of why URI aliases are sometimes

I have changed the editorial text and the image to use URI alias rather than
URI proxy.  Note I've also updated the editorial text with some of your
suggestions, but I didn't add text about at risk since I think the existence
of editorial text that highlights the concerns and the fact that it is a
FPWD adequately addresses this.

-- Chimezie


P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Cleveland Clinic is ranked one of the top hospitals
in America by U.S. News & World Report (2008).  
Visit us online at http://www.clevelandclinic.org for
a complete listing of our services, staff and

Confidentiality Note:  This message is intended for use
only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable
law.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or the employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If
you have received this communication in error,  please
contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in
its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy.  Thank you.
Received on Monday, 12 October 2009 16:46:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:00:57 UTC