Re: Hash vs Hashless URIs

Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> On 11 December 2012 14:48, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>wrote:
> 
>> Excerpts from Melvin Carvalho's message of 2012-11-21 15:51:49 +0000:
>>> On 21 November 2012 15:43, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Excerpts from Kingsley Idehen's message of 2012-11-21 14:18:13 +0000:
>>>>> Please call vote on this matter. I have better things to do with my
>>>>> time. If a majority want a WebID to be defined a hash based HTTP URI,
>>>>> let's get that in the open right now. We all have decisions to make
>>>>> about how we spend our time and priorities across our respective
>>>>> development efforts.
>>>> $ curl -I http://sebastian.tramp.name
>>>> HTTP/1.1 303 See Other
>>>> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 14:33:16 GMT
>>>> Server: Apache/2.2.14 (Ubuntu)
>>>> X-Powered-By: PHP/5.3.2-1ubuntu4.18
>>>> X-Pingback: http://pingback.aksw.org/
>>>> Location: http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/SebastianTramp
>>>> Vary: Accept-Encoding
>>>> Content-Type: text/html
>>>>
>>>> personally i would also like to use WebID without #i or #me or #self or
>>>> #elf or #wtf ;)
>>>>
>>> elf, can you explain why you would want this ... do you have any specific
>>> reason, or is it simply a 'vanity' url?
>> first of all apologies for this super delayed reply!
>>
>> to start in very general way, i like when we design technology that serves
>> people and make sure that we don't expect people to stretch their comfort
>> ONLY to fit some technological solution (at the same time i don't mind
>> encouraging some stretching but motivated with more extensional reasons!) i
>> also realize that we design with certain group of people in mind as well -
>> *developers* - but if someone needs to stretch from technical reasons ... ;)
>>
>> when i think of a concept of ID, i see most people identifying themselves
>> nowadays with either their email address (including unfortunate @twitter
>> thing) or their homepage / online profile. i see various challenges people
>> from webfinger/simple web discovery face with using email like identifiers,
>> and i agree that we can simplify certain things by sticking to HTTP. when
>> it comes to identifying onself with certain HTTP URL, may people may have
>> their homepage, blog, various online profiles. sometimes people also print
>> them on their personal cards. i've never seen someone using a URL with
>> #something it for personal homepage or online profile. i understand
>> distinction between referencing an online profile and entity which this
>> profile describes, still requiring people to use #whatever feel to me like
>> putting burden on those who *just want to use this damn thing*, and very
>> likely brining confusion to broad audience.
>>
>> besides making pools and discussions within this group, mostly with people
>> having strong and at least medium (like myself) understanding of underlying
>> technologies. i would like to look for feedback from people like *my
>> auntie* or at least *arts student* who can find their way in interacting
>> online but see this whole thing as a magical black box.
>>
>> from my perspective sticking to identifiers like http://funkyjohny.me or
>> http://funkyclub.org/johny can make it simplest for people to really
>> identify oneself with such URL, which to my understanding mean that even
>> using 303 may bring confusion if we type http://funkyjohny.me and end up
>> somewhere let's say on http://funkyjohny.me/profile
>>
>> looking at present tendencies in online interaction, besides crafting
>> technologies with solid technical foundations we MUST also make sure that
>> we make them SEXY!
>>
>> once more i see it very impractical to design beautiful *Interaction
>> Experience* just within circle of geeks and such *front end* related issues
>> i would like to confront with people who consider internet as magical thing
>> :)
>>
>> last but not least i would like to say that i find great appreciation to
>> all the work people do in this and other related working groups! and i
>> would find it a big shame if lack of SEXYness become and obstacle to a
>> broad adoption of this work...
>>
> 
> FWIW I have tried explaining # URIs to people of all ages, male and
> female.  I start by saying that we have the concept of web pages.  Then I
> tell them that it is possible to split web pages up into sections using the
> # character.  Each section can be about a different topic.  Then each topic
> can have properties and attributes in it's own right.
> 
> I have *never* once failed to explain this to a non technical person in
> less than 5 minutes.  In fact most people come back to me and say, that was
> very easy.
> 
> It's only the "cool kids" that find this concept very hard to grasp.  That
> is because it requires unlearning what they have learnt.  It's sad to say
> that some web developers will never understand this.  It's not about lack
> of knowledge, it's about preconcieved notions.  This is not unique to the
> web, it's true in many fields.

I agree, for most developers (including myself) the semantic web and 
general web architecture involved a big dose of unlearning.

#frag URIs are as complex as looking up a chapter in a book, a scene on 
a dvd, a level in a game, or a student in a class room.

IMHO, much of the confusion is around using full URIs, but that can 
easily be masked by simple ux/ui/syntax trickery..  :bob and @bob.

Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2012 14:29:51 UTC