W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > August 2007

RE: Does follow-your-nose apply in the enterprise? was: RDF for molecules, using InChI

From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 23:02:59 -0400
Message-ID: <EBBD956B8A9002479B0C9CE9FE14A6C2030DBDF3@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>
To: "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: <ogbujic@ccf.org>, "public-semweb-lifesci hcls" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, <wangxiao@musc.edu>

> From: Bijan Parsia
> On 9 Aug 2007, at 10:32, Xiaoshu Wang wrote:
> > [ . . . ]
> > What kind of difference does it  
> > make to an agent for the following two resources.
> > a) http://404/a/b/c - returns a 404
> > b) lsid:404:a:b:c    - non-dereferenciable
> Clearly it marks a difference in intent. It allows me, the term  
> coiner, to communicate the fact that I don't intend for you to find  
> information directly by GETting that uri  [ . . . ]

If you never intend to make your URI dereferenceable then there
certainly is no point in making it an http URI.  You might as well use a
non-dereferenceable URN.

However, the purpose of this discussion is to come up with community
recommendations on minting URIs.  As such:

 - They will be recommendations, not requirements.

 - They should be designed to best benefit the community as a whole.

It seems clear that any such recommendations should be designed to best
facilitate the publication and re-use of URIs by others, and making URIs
dereferenceable to useful metadata is certainly one convenient way to
help do so.

In short, I think your example has nicely illustrated the fact that a
particular URI owner could still have good (or bad) reasons *not* to
make its URIs dereferenceable, and hence may choose to use URNs.  That
is its prerogative.  But that does not mean that our *recommendations*
should encourage such practice.

David Booth, Ph.D.
HP Software
+1 617 629 8881 office  |  dbooth@hp.com

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not represent
the official views of HP unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Received on Saturday, 18 August 2007 03:06:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:20:29 UTC