W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > July 2012

Re: currentModel attribute for /Product

From: Joshua J Wulf <jwulf@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:38:44 +1000
Message-ID: <5015BB74.1010308@redhat.com>
To: Tom Morris <tfmorris@gmail.com>
CC: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, Dave Caroline <dave.thearchivist@gmail.com>, Kenley Lamaute <kenleyl@microsoft.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 07/29/2012 02:49 PM, Tom Morris wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Martin Hepp 
> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org 
> <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>> wrote:
>     I think there is a misunderstanding here: While it is *desirable*
>     that an HTTP URI returns a representation when tried with a HTTP
>     GET method, the role as a unique identifier *does not break* if
>     the inventor of the URI goes bankrupt and stops serving
>     representations from that URI.
> There's definitely a misunderstanding, but I'm not sure where it lies.
> If the domain registrant gives up their registration, for whatever 
> reason, and the new domain owner starts minting new URIs in the same 
> namespace, what implications does that have for the URIs that are now 
> invalid (not because they don't resolve, but because they are no 
> longer considered valid by the namespace owner).

Tom, the only potential problem is if the new owner reuses an existing 
URI to refer to a different product. That's a real edge case, and yeah, 
if you do the wrong thing, bad things result.

In the context of this proposal the URI is being used as a UUID. Getting 
something back when you dereference it is not essential functionality 
for this use case; it's an entirely optional bonus. The owner does not 
need to consider them valid or serve anything at that URL - they just 
need to not use that URI to indicate a different product.

> As Dan pointed out, it's a low probability event that needs to be 
> dealt with in an out of band fashion, but it does happen.
> Tom
>     On Jul 28, 2012, at 1:36 PM, Dave Caroline wrote:
>     > I can see a glaring hole in the URI as a unique identifier
>     >
>     > If large corp creates a product and defines the uri as
>     > http:uri.largecorp.com/steamenginetype1
>     <http://uri.largecorp.com/steamenginetype1>
>     >
>     > Sells a million but goes bust a while later what of the id
>     > we now have a dead link breaking the chain
>     We only have a dead link for browsers, but the link is not dead
>     for building a graph of statements.
>     Best
>     Martin
>     --------------------------------------------------------
>     martin hepp
>     e-business & web science research group
>     universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
>     e-mail: hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org <mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>     phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4217>
>     fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 <tel:%2B49-%280%2989-6004-4620>
>     www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
>     http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
>     skype:   mfhepp
>     twitter: mfhepp
>     Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
>     =================================================================
>     * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/
Received on Sunday, 29 July 2012 22:39:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:48:47 UTC