- From: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 23:14:05 +0100
- To: semantic-web@w3.org, Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: Ora Lassila <ora.lassila@nokia.com>
Patrick, It's funny you should say that, because I think I just added some weight to your argument -- I just implemented a URIQA server using Ora's Wilbur[1] toolkit and the Araneida Web server[2]. It only took me a few hours of work, and I think everything's in there barring the facets format (the PDF for which seems to have disappeared). Extending my other software clients to use it is trivial, and (seeing as they also use Wilbur) making a knowledge-sharing web of apps using URIQA is a simple matter. Granted, this has not been well-tested, and I haven't compared it thoroughly to the reference implementation (there's a shortage of Windows machines in my office!), but it seems to work on my machine :) I thought you might be interested regardless. Full scoop at [3]. -R [1] <http://wilbur-rdf.sourceforge.net> [2] <http://cliki.net/Araneida> [3] <http://www.holygoat.co.uk/blog/entry/2005-04-04-2> On Apr 4, 2005, at 07:17, Patrick Stickler wrote: > Actually, because URIQA is based at the lowest architectural layer of > the web, the > HTTP protocol itself, adoption of URIQA is orders of magnitude easier > and less > costly than other "best practice" solutions (e.g. special headers, > embedded metadata, > content negotiation, etc.) because implementation and deployment of > the fundamental > URIQA functionality can be constrained to the web server platform > itself, either > natively or by plug in, and each web site owner does not have to > introduce, police, > and manage the practices of each user, but rather, each user is free > to exploit > the standardized functionality made available for describing resources.
Received on Monday, 4 April 2005 22:14:13 UTC