- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 16:14:47 +0200
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: "RDF-WG public-rdf-wg@w3.org" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On May 12, 2011, at 15:36 , Richard Cyganiak wrote: > On 12 May 2011, at 13:12, Ivan Herman wrote: >> Just to clarify: in the course of the discussion we mentioned the alternative of shorter and friendlier, albeit non dereferencable URIs (not replacing the .well-known but as another possibility); I think one idea was to use urn:steveH:XXXXX. Is the intention that we do not go down that line? Just checking... > > Several options were discussed: > > - steveH:xxx > - urn:steveH:xxx > - urn:uuid:xxx > - tag:w3.org,2011:steveH:xxx > - tag:yourdomain:/.well-known/steveH/xxx > - http://yourdomain/.well-knonwn/steveH/xxx > > Of these, I had the impression that there is the most solid case for the last one, so that's what I put in the proposal. > > Of course it could mention more than one option, but the fewer the better. > I will not fight for this, because I am also happy to keep to one, but, if this is the last round of discussion (you see how optimistic I am?:-), it is worth making the choices clear. Ivan > I'd be tempted to put the proposal to the vote with only the HTTP option and see if it draws any objections. > > Best, > Richard > > > >> >> Ivan >> >> P.S. I actually think steveH is a perfect keyword:-) >> >> >> >> On May 12, 2011, at 13:47 , Richard Cyganiak wrote: >> >>> Below is a complete proposal including intro text and detailed wording about the .well-known mechanism, based on a combination of the original proposal from the wiki, and PatH's comments. It's also on the wiki here: >>> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Skolemisation#Updated_Proposal >>> >>> >>> On 28 Apr 2011, at 06:10, Pat Hayes wrote: >>>> I would prefer to avoid the "skolem" terminology altogether. >>> >>> I am fine with avoiding “skolem”. But I believe that *some* term is necessary. First, writing the spec is awkward if one has to repeatedly refer to “an IRI that has been introduced solely to replace a blank node”. Second, I believe that eventually we and others will come to use *some* shorthand term in everyday technical conversation, so why not just bite the bullet and define a term for it in the spec. >>> >>> I'll stick to “Skolem IRI” for now, until another term has been proposed. I removed mentions of “Skolemization”. >>> >>>> it really ought to be capitalized, as it is a direct use of the name of Theo Skolem. >>> >>> Thoralf. I have now capitalized the term. >>> >>>> It is not clear what is meant by " identifiable by other systems". Identifiable as being skolem URIs? Or in some stronger sense of 'identifiable'? If the former, I suggest the wording "identifiable by other systems as Skolem URIs" >>> >>> This wording seems fine. I ended up using “recognizable outside of the system boundaries” to avoid “identify” and talking about “systems and other systems”. >>> >>> The complete proposal is below. >>> >>> Best, >>> Richard >>> >>> >>> PROPOSAL FOR ADDRESSING ISSUE-40 >>> >>> Add the following in RDF Concepts, Section 6.6 Blank Nodes >>> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-blank-nodes >>> >>> >>> 6.6.1 Replacing blank nodes with IRIs >>> >>> Blank nodes do not have an intrinsic name in the RDF abstract syntax. In situations where such a name is required, implementations MAY systematically replace blank nodes in an RDF graph with IRIs. Systems wishing to do this SHOULD mint a new, globally unique IRI for each blank node. Such IRIs are known as ''Skolem IRIs''. >>> >>> Systems may wish to mint Skolem IRIs in such a way that they can recognize the IRIs as having been introduced solely to replace a blank node, and map back to the source blank node where possible. >>> >>> Systems which want Skolem IRIs to be recognizable outside of the system boundaries SHOULD use a well-known IRI [RFC5785] with the registered name “SteveH”. This is an IRI that uses the HTTP or HTTPS scheme, or another scheme that has been specified to use well-known IRIs; and whose path component starts with /.well-known/SteveH/ . >>> >>> For example, the authority responsible for the domain “example.com” could mint the following recognizable Skolem IRI: >>> >>> http://example.com/.well-known/SteveH/d26a2d0e98334696f4ad70a677abc1f6 >>> >>> Note: “SteveH” is a placeholder. Names currently under discussion are “genid”, “bnode”, “skolem”. >>> >>> Note: RFC 5758 only specifies well-known URIs, not IRIs. For the purpose of this document, a well-known IRI is any IRI that results in a well-known URI after IRI-to-URI mapping [RFC3987]. >>> >>> >> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> mobile: +31-641044153 >> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html >> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >> >> >> >> >> >> > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Thursday, 12 May 2011 14:15:40 UTC