Re: [ALL] proposed resolution httpRange-14

At 06:11 PM 3/17/2005 +0000, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>I propose that
>
>an http URI without a hash MAY be used to identify an RDF property
...
>Our primary concern is:
>    - deployed semantic web applications such as Dublin Core [1],
>Friend-of-a-friend [2], Creative Commons [3], Adobe XMP [4], RSS 1.0 [5]
>that use such URIs
>
>Other important concerns are:
>    - the practical difficulty of using '#' namespace URIs for large
>vocabularies such as wordnet
>    - the impossibility of doing server side redirects on '#' URIs

We might quibble over whether there is a "primary" concern and
two "secondary" ones or whether each is primary to some
constituency.  We heard input at the Boston meeting that each
of these three was key to someone.

I suggest rewording as "Our primary concerns are:" and not
separating two subclasses.  I further suggest generalizing
"server side redirects on '#'" to "server side processing of
the fragment identifier component" (that is the language of
RFC 3986).

Otherwise, I have no trouble with the tone of this draft (or perhaps
have simply gotten comfortable with it.)  I think the TAG will understand
that we are prompted to send this resolution by a consensus that leaving
it as an open issue is as much or more harmful to our deployment efforts
as are some of the possible TAG findings on the issue.

-Ralph

Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2005 19:00:48 UTC