- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 12:51:32 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 31/08/12 12:29, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > It claims any RDF document is a Linked Data document. That simply isn't > accurate. The RDF spec makes no claims about IRIs being: > > 1. de-referencable > 2. http: scheme based. Let's talk about what the document actually says in section 3.1 and not make comments about political opinion and what one "ideal world" might look like. The document says: [[ 7. IRIs used within a linked data graph SHOULD be dereferenceable to a Linked Data document describing the resource denoted by that IRI. ]] SHOULD, not MUST. In reality, not all IRIs are going to be dereferencable. The condition should be "potentially dereferencable" because the burden is far too high otherwise. We all might think it is a good idea but I for one am not going to condemn a data publisher if it uses another scheme or has not put up a document at some URI at the time of publication. The publisher might have very good reasons for it. From experience, this is impractical anyway because you can loose control of a URI space. URIs live on. JSON-LD does not mention http: schemes and is not limited to them. http: is highly desirable but not necessary. Andy
Received on Friday, 31 August 2012 11:52:04 UTC