- From: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:01:36 +1000
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: Michel_Dumontier <Michel_Dumontier@carleton.ca>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, W3C HCLSIG hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
2009/3/24 Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>: > If you are going to honor the Identity principle on the Web, in an > unobtrusive manner (i.e., leverage ubiquity of HTTP) there is no way around > the above. I never thought of it as honour. The large number of ideals surrounding the redirect law still don't impress me. The linked rdf web is coming along despite these ideals increasing the general apathy to the whole concept so far IMO. The fact that this debate is still going is worrying, but hopefully it won't stop people discovering the usefulness of shared resolvable identifiers which form the real basis to the usefulness of linked rdf. Just curious though, how is it *actually* obtrusive not to implement a redirect if ones ideals tell one that there is no functional difference in the nature of the resource whether its representation was derived from the result of a redirect or not? If people want to track provenance as Michel says, they can either recognise that some triples have predicates which relate to provenance and others are independent of the provenance, or they can store the provenance information in a different graph and query across the two if needed. That part is up to the interested end-user and really shouldn't raise the entry bar to new producers. Cheers, Peter Ansell
Received on Tuesday, 24 March 2009 06:02:12 UTC