- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 08:23:41 -0400
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- cc: Andrew Newman <andrew@tucanatech.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Andrew Newman wrote: > > >The main problem we've had with named graphs is that it can be a pain on > >a machine that has multiple names or names that change over time. If I > >create a models based on machine names called "http://192.168.10.1/foo" > >and then move to another network and suddenly it's > >"http://10.0.0.42/foo" then all my existing queries stop working. I now > >prefer URNs for models not URIs and add a level of indirection between > >them (I think this has been mentioned before). > > That just feels like a bug - at least at the usability level. Surely it is > sensible to change machines and be able to use the same data (at least as a > possiblity and I would have thought even as a default) including queries? Suggested Best Practice: when making up URIs to name things, only use URIs which you'll likely be able to respond to for the maximum expected lifetime of your data. purl.org is a good approach if you have no confidence in your own domain name. When you really can't do that, use a b-node, but try hard not to, since b-nodes don't allow easy graph connections. This is orthogonal to named-graphs/quads -- it applies just as well to assigning URIs to the usual things (dogs, cars, and coffee-makers, of course :-). -- sandro
Received on Friday, 10 September 2004 12:21:11 UTC