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

On 2/17/13 4:18 PM, Stéphane Corlosquet wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Melvin Carvalho 
> <melvincarvalho@gmail.com <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>> 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
>     <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/identity-respec.html#dfn-webid>
>     to the WebID Profile
>     <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/identity-respec.html#dfn-webid_profile>.
>     All examples in the spec will use such hash URIs."
>
>     https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/raw-file/tip/spec/identity-respec.html#the-webid-http-uri
>
>     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.
>
> I agree, and your argument above makes sense, Melvin. By 
> not mentioning 303s anywhere in the spec, we would keep the spec 
> simple and bring less confusion. We use hash URIs in all our examples, 
> and people who are new to WebID and looking at implementing this will 
> use hash URIs. People who prefer to use 303s are free to do so. If 
> they know about 303s, they most likely know what they are doing and 
> the trade offs etc. The wiki could present different views on how to 
> implement WebID (including 303s with a big warning if you like) but 
> the spec would be free of such implementation details. Again, the spec 
> becomes more simple and straight forward as a result.
>
> re establishing the relation between the WebID URI and the Profile 
> document: we can simply say that the Profile document is whatever you 
> get by dereferencing the WebID URI according to the HTTP protocol. The 
> WebID URI must be different from the Profile document URI, and hash 
> URIs is the most intuite way to do that.
>
> A this point, a vote might be more fruitful to solve this than another 
> perma-thread.

+1


>
> -- 
> Steph.
>
> PS: argument above is in line with Elf's point too re obviousness of 
> HTTP redirects.


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen