Re: WebID 1.0 -- Section 3 -- Removal of Note

On 2/17/13 7:59 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> "Note
> Hash URIs are encouraged when choosing a WebID since 303 redirects 
> require an extra HTTP request for an Agent to get from the WebID 
> <> 
> to the WebID Profile 
> <>. 
> All examples in the spec will use such hash URIs."
> This has come up in some other threads.
> Leaving the # vs slash "perma debate" aside, may I propose that this 
> part is removed.
> While, I am in favour of the sentiment of using # URIs but I dont see 
> any evidence that this note will have the desired effect.  Why even 
> mention 303s at all?  All the examples use # URIs so, imho, this point 
> is not really needed, and may add confusion to implementers.


That's the point, in a nutshell.

We have removal of the unnecessary notice versus the kind of thread 
that's ensued.

My fundamental hypothesis is that the notice is an utter distraction and 
vector for the kind of thread that's ensued. When implementing a Linked 
Data solution you will immediately realise that there are tradeoffs 
using either style of HTTP URI.

The thing about Linked Data -- like anything else that inherits the 
essence of AWWW -- is that it is "deceptively simple" which makes it 
ultra susceptible to theoretical speculation. Understanding the nuances 
of this most powerful aspect of the Web requires getting one's hands 
very dirty by way of actual solution implementation.



Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web:
Personal Weblog:
Twitter/ handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile:
LinkedIn Profile:

Received on Sunday, 17 February 2013 17:31:01 UTC