Kingsley Idehen wrote: > Dan Brickley wrote: >> David Huynh wrote: >>> >>> Kingsley Idehen wrote: >>>> Question: Is there any fundamental reason why you cannot expose URIs >>>> or URLs where you have "javascript:{}"? Would this break your work >>>> in anyway? >>> Just for you, Kingsley, I have fixed it :-) You might need to >>> shift-reload to get the latest code. >>> >>> I wasn't actually expecting such an intense reaction to just >>> "javascript:{}". I wonder if that might put off newcomers, who >>> believe that the slightest profanity against The URIs on this mailing >>> list will always trigger such adverse reactions. >> >> Ah, we're an excitable bunch around here ;) >> >> Regardless of whether these data URLs are available, the UI work is >> exciting and I'm glad you shared it with the W3C lists. If others have >> smart ideas for visualising and navigating RDFesque datasets (whether >> closed or open by various definitions), let me be clear: they're very >> welcome to post them to semantic-web@w3.org. I hope our enthusiasm >> hereabouts for open data doesn't discourage people for sharing >> innovative UI ideas. We need all the help we can get! :) >> > Dan, > > I hope you understand my response to David was very much in the vein of > "two-for-one" by taking what was a private discussion (between David and > I) public for broader knowledge exchange and general discourse purposes. Sure! No criticism intended (or hopefully, felt). I think generally the culture around here is one of "hey, let us see the data!" and that's pretty healthy. I just wanted to stress that people with other things to contribute shouldn't mistakenly get the impression that their stuff is somehow SemWeb-irrelevant just 'cos the data might not currently be online at public URLs. cheers, Dan -- http://danbri.org/Received on Monday, 18 August 2008 14:10:07 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:08 UTC