W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > August 2006

Re: In defence of 404 ...

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 12:41:01 -0500
To: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
Cc: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, semantic-web@w3.org, Franck Cotton <franck.cotton@insee.fr>
Message-Id: <1154972461.30621.233.camel@dirk.w3.org>

On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 17:33 +0200, Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> Bernard and Dan,
> Le lundi 07 août 2006 à 16:59 +0200, Bernard Vatant a écrit : 
> > Dan
> > > Ah... I misread your point. Indeed, in the general case,
> > > lots of documents may discuss the same resource, and none
> > > of them is authoritative. If DOC1#T1 and DOC2#T1 both
> > > refer to France, there is no web architecture mechanism
> > > for determining which is authoritative.
> > >   
> > OK. But I don't want to have DOC1#T1 *and* DOC2#T1 as two distinct URIs 
> > defining France. I want one URI to define France. 
> [...]
> > Sure it is. But the point is that I don't want to change the file. I 
> > want to publish a new one about the same entities, without deprecating 
> > the old one.
> I don't know if that's what Bernard would call elegant :), but what
> about defining T1 in both DOC1 and DOC2 with a xml:base equal to DOC
> (which means that in both DOC1 and DOC2, the identifier for #T1 is
> neither DOC1#T1 nor DOC2#T1 but DOC#T1) and using a placeholder at the
> address DOC#T1 with links (using rdfs:seeAlso or whatever) toward DOC1
> and DOC2?
> (Note that the mechanism can be adapted to slash URIs.)
> That keeps DOC1 and DOC2 "equally normative". Applications which want to
> use them directly can do it and applications which don't have a clue
> where they can find information about DOC#T1 can dereference this URI to
> get a first idea where that can look. 
> I see that as the equivalent of RDDL for namespace URIs: you use the URI
> to publish a hint for applications that have no idea what the namespace
> is about.
> Would that be acceptable for both of you?

Hmm... yes, I think so.

Note that what the tabulator will do is follow both seeAlso links
and merge the data from DOC1 and DOC2. That seems consistent
with what you intend: "equally normative".

> The last solution if this doesn't work for you could be to use either
> non HTTP URIs or even anonymous RDF nodes and a
> owl:InverseFunctionalProperty. Seems to be an overkill to me since in
> this case we have a central authority which can define URIs but the
> INSEE code is a perfect candidate for being an
> owl:InverseFunctionalProperty...
> Eric
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 7 August 2006 17:41:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:44:58 UTC