- From: Michael Brunnbauer <brunni@netestate.de>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:41:07 +0200
- To: Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
- Cc: public-rww@w3.org
hi all, I don't think the httprange14 situation is so bad that we have to consider revolutionary proposals but just in case it gets so bad, I have an idea based on Jenis idea (http://www.jenitennison.com/blog/node/170) that I like: -Remove any restriction on what a URL with 200 statuscode denotes per se -Move httprange14 into RDF semantics: If a URL with 200 statuscode is used in a triple, it denotes what it accesses. I guess this does not have to be part of the formalism. -Extend the RDF abstract syntax and semantics with a way to express if the content or the sense of a URL is meant in a triple. Old style triples stay valid but will be interpreted with the httprange14-rule above. This would also be an opportunity to introduce n-tuples / n-ary relations ;-) Regards, Michael Brunnbauer On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 01:22:58PM +0200, Michael Brunnbauer wrote: > > Hello Michiel, > > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 12:20:04PM +0200, Michiel de Jong wrote: > > i think Jeni's proposal is valid, and 303s and hash uri rule are not. > > I think a cleaner way would have been to introduce a content and a sense > function for URLs and a way so specify which one should be applied in a > statement to get the property argument. This way we would not have several > properties where we really mean *one* property. But to specify which function > should be applied requires additional elements which do not fit into the > RDF abstract syntax. > > > > In the case of properties like dcterms:subject, we need four different > > > properties. > > > > that was also my second thought. > [...] > > no. if a vocabulary has not already thought about which one of the 4 > > options a certain property means, then it was broken. > > You just conceded that with dcterms:subject there are 4 valid options > and not a single one. So you think the dcterms vocabulary is "broken" because > it does not include the three variants of dcterms:subject that somehow relate > to the content of a URL ? Would not the URL have to be a typed literal in > this case ? > > Regards, > > Michael Brunnbauer > > -- > ++ Michael Brunnbauer > ++ netEstate GmbH > ++ Geisenhausener Straße 11a > ++ 81379 München > ++ Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80 > ++ Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89 > ++ E-Mail brunni@netestate.de > ++ http://www.netestate.de/ > ++ > ++ Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München) > ++ USt-IdNr. DE221033342 > ++ Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer > ++ Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel -- ++ Michael Brunnbauer ++ netEstate GmbH ++ Geisenhausener Straße 11a ++ 81379 München ++ Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80 ++ Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89 ++ E-Mail brunni@netestate.de ++ http://www.netestate.de/ ++ ++ Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München) ++ USt-IdNr. DE221033342 ++ Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer ++ Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel
Received on Thursday, 5 July 2012 10:41:36 UTC