- From: Phil Dawes <pdawes@users.sf.net>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 17:42:42 +0100
- To: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Hi Steve, Hi RDF Interest, (this is a reply to a old mail) Steve Harris writes: > > On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 09:57:53 +0100, Phil Dawes wrote: > > I'm now considering using opaque numbers in URIs to represent things - > > e.g. http://sw.example.com/2003/01/application/23 - and am wondering if > > other people do this and what their experiences are. > > In particular, what would be the advantages/disadvantages of working > > in a world where URIs contain little human-readable information? > > We do this a lot (for the reasons you mention), both with a process that > generates a stream of unique numbers and by hashing some existing unique > (but recognisable) ID, as appropriate. > Do you use any opaque URIs for properties and classes? The reason I ask is because I'm currently re-writing veudas (web rdf editor) to generate unique uris using a hashing scheme - this is useful because it allieviates the user from having to think about RDF/URIs when creating new resource data (which is a good thing because I want it to be used by non-rdf-savvy users). Currently I'm steering away from this mechanism for creating properties, since it makes rdf queries completely unreadable and hand-writing rdql virtually impossible. But the advantages are so compelling to me that I'm wondering if opaque uris are the way forward for classes/properties too. Maybe developers could use a gui tool to generate their queries (including comments) before cut-n-pasting into code? Anyway - I'd be interested to hear of any experiences/thoughts you might have in this area. Many thanks, Phil
Received on Monday, 7 June 2004 15:20:25 UTC