Re: (Lost in the noise perhaps - so asking again) - Is a trailing slash 'better' than a trailing hash for vocabs namespace IRIs?

On 2022-10-07 09:07, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote:
 > Terms of a vocabulary/ontology rarely make sense in isolation. So
 > arguably, serving the entire vocabulary provides you with enough context
 > to understand/use the term appropriately.


That, and this:

On 2022-10-11 11:23, Hugh Glaser wrote:
> The basis of Linked Data is that you find the triples of authority for an entity by resolving the URI, and munching what you get back.


Which rests on the notion of URI ownership and persistence as per AWWW.


> This is why I think use cases are needed - slash [..] will incur extra fetching costs for the terms.


... and, relatively a more complicated setup when the terms are 
distributed, e.g., resource management, control, policy, authoring and 
publishing environments, versioning, archivability ...

URI owners can decide for themselves how to go about URI persistence 
without boiling matters of policy and commitment down to / vs #.

Vocabs in the wild are predominantly domain-specific and not monolithic. 
If anything, # is demonstrably simpler to specify and request than /.

As mentioned, a best practice would either be, specific to a use case; 
reflect empirical evidence, e.g., what characteristics do majority of 
the vocabs share?; help URI owners when considering persistence policies.

-Sarven
https://csarven.ca/#i

Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2022 11:41:55 UTC