Re: Using "Punning" to Answer httpRange-14

Hi Kingsley,

i would love to learn more from what you wrote, but as a non-native
speaker, and on top of that a newcomer to the world of web
architecture, i have quite a bit of trouble understanding what you
mean. let me point in your message where i did not understand what you
are saying.

On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
> There are two types of 303 people:
>
> 1. Those that wander into the realm

which realm? wander in which sense?

> 2. Those that have opted to support non # URIs using this pattern.

ok, so from this i understand the hash-uri-rule is a default from
which 303 diverges? interesting, i had considered them both candidate
proposals, each with their own limited following. so i think what
you're saying with 'support non # URIs' is:
- if the URI contains a #, then it's always to be interpreted as
object-sense, never as object-content.
- if it doesn't then the default (hash-uri-rule) is to interpret it as
object-content, *but* 303 people of type 2 will still interpret
object-sense if retrieving the URL results in a 303.

>
> #1 could care less

i'm familiar with the expression "couldn't care less", but care about
what? '#1' refers here to the 303 people who wonder into the realm i
think, but are you saying the do care or they don't care? and what is
it they care about or not? i am reading this for the second time now
and it's really too abstract for me to parse, please explain this to
me as if you're talking to a 6 year old.

> since they haven't even bought into

see below

> the concept of semantic fidelity

i searched for that concept and saw it used in some places but could
not find any definition of it. do you have a link? i would love to
learn! i'm assuming it means to make it less ambiguous (to a machine
and/or to a human) what a certain document means.

> via structured content bearing

i'm assuming the structured content here could be like a web page,
right? so we're talking about adding

> relational property graphs.

to web pages. i searched the web for 'definition "relational property
graph" ' and found this link
https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/posts/LwEb8ccs8on where
the term is used (by you actually! :) but i could not find any clear
definition. so for the 3rd time within one sentence i find myself
guessing at the definition of the phrases you use. my best guess would
be that a relational property graph is a graph that expresses how
objects relate to each other, and you label outgoing edges as
properties of that node, like the "parent" property of node A is a
pointer to node B iff node B is the parent of node A. So i guess
adding such information to structured content is like what we do if we
add a 'property' attribute to a link or to an html element in a web
page, right?

ok, so putting that all together, what you're saying is that the
people who view 303 as a fallback for hash-uri-rule have not bought
into adding semantic markup into the document itself.

that's confusing to me. why would you even care about if a link is
object-sense or object-content if you don't know the "flavour" of the
link?

i did try to read the rest of your post, but i didn't understand it
either. i hope this reply makes clear that i really don't understand a
word of what you're saying! :) i stumble and have to make assumptions
about what i think you might mean, several times per sentence.

can you maybe summarize your post in language as if you are talking to
a 6-year-old non-expert who is at the same time not a native speaker?
of course i'm exaggerating, but it's really true that i can't learn
from you if you speak in the language you speak in.

cheers!
Michiel

Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 08:20:23 UTC