- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 00:37:50 +0000
- To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- CC: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>, Jόrgen Jakobitsch <j.jakobitsch@semantic-web.at>, WebID Group <public-webid@w3.org>
Henry Story wrote: > On 28 Nov 2012, at 23:59, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote: > >> On 28 Nov 2012, at 21:25, Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com> wrote: >> >>> All -- >>> >>> A potentially interesting bit here, since one of the major >>> points of all this discussion is interoperability of tools >>> and the power of follow-your-nose... >>> >>> >>> On Nov 24, 2012, at 05:52 AM, Henry Story wrote: >>> >>>> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows >>>> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/mbox >>>> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person >>>> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent >>> The above all look right in my Mail.app, and I can click any >>> of them and get redirected to <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/>. >>> >>> ( >>> Tangentially, this redirection seems overly broad. >>> >>> Remembering that 303s can be applied to the document portion >>> of a URI, but cannot take the fragment ID into account [while >>> 303 *targets* *can* include a fragment ID.], I would expect >>> the first URI above to redirect to either >>> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#knows> or >>> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/knows> [which could then >>> redirect again to <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#knows>] ... >>> and actually, I'd expect the generic /spec/ to redirect to >>> a specifically versioned target, not the other way around... >>> ) >>> >>> >>> >>> But the following, which Henry initially seemed to be >>> suggesting as better (though his conclusion seems otherwise)? >>> >>>> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows# >>>> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/mbox# >>>> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person# >>>> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent# >>> These URIs don't look right in Mail.app. >>> >>> The URI highlighting stops at the last solidus ("/"), so >>> they all look like links to the same page -- >>> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> -- and that is where clicking >>> them takes me. >> Does the following work better? I had perhaps wrongly used a unicode character >> right after the # . >> >> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows#it >> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/mbox#it >> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person#it >> - http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent#it > > Mhh. No they don't as each of them redirect to the > same URI it seems: > > http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#it > > $ curl -I http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows > HTTP/1.1 303 See Other > Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 23:23:34 GMT > Server: Apache/2.2.14 (Ubuntu) > Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * > Location: http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/ > Vary: Accept-Encoding > Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 > > That seems unfortunate. Sorry for the slow response, as I could have saved some time. By HTTP(bis), the fragment must be recombined "If the original URI, as navigated to by the user agent, did contain a fragment identifier, and the final value does not, then the original URI's fragment identifier is added to the final value." http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p2-semantics-21#section-8.1.2 so if you have <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows#it> and you GET <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows> which redirects 303 to <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/> then the final URI (by HTTP) is ... ... <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#it> ... for every property in the above scenario BUT that's by HTTP. By RDF you'd just look to see what the representation ultimately received after the chain of redirects said about <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/knows#it>. Of course, this does raise a few nuances.. like by HTTP all the URIs you suggested would be equivalent to <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#it> ;) Best, Nathan
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2012 00:39:03 UTC