- From: Dave Viner <dviner@apache.org>
- Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 13:36:22 -0800
- To: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
[I earlier sent this message to semantic-web@w3.org... but this seems to be the list which is continuing the discussion] I got to thinking about Danny Ayer's comments: "The other approach that springs to mind, not as far as I'm aware standardized or particularly deployed (but I'm sure some folks will be using it) is to use a special query, maybe: http://example.org/food/blah?about# to get the lowdown on http://example.org/food/blah It would be relatively straightforward to implement, e.g. get Apache to redirect to a query on a triplestore." This is an interesting solution. I definitely agree that it would restrict the URI creator/originator's freedom. However, what if we just used another feature of HTTP to handle this? I'm thinking of the Accept HTTP header. Here's a snippet from the rfc (http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2068/rfc2068) " The Accept request-header field can be used to specify certain media types which are acceptable for the response. Accept headers can be used to indicate that the request is specifically limited to a small set of desired types, as in the case of a request for an in-line image. " I think it should be feasible to issue this sort of request: GET /food/blah HTTP/1.1 Host: example.com Accept: application/rdf+xml In theory, this should return /food/blah *only* in rdf+xml. This request should return different results than a "regular" http/html request: GET /food/blah HTTP/1.1 Host: example.com Accept: text/html, */* I know that many servers don't respect the Accept: header, but it sure seems like it is designed to supply different types of media for identical URLs. Thoughts? dave -----Original Message----- From: Danny Ayers [mailto:danny.ayers@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 3:22 AM To: Stephen Rhoads Cc: semantic-web@w3.org; www-rdf-interest@w3.org Subject: Re: SemWeb Non-Starter -- Distributed URI Discovery On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:49:39 -0500, Stephen Rhoads <rhoadsnyc@mac.com> wrote: > As far as I can tell, there is no formal, generalized mechanism to reliably query the owner of a URI in order to obtain an RDF Description of that URI. And this is a serious impediment to the Semantic Web. Yep, and arguably it extends beyond just query - >From URIQA [1]: [[ As the Semantic Web emerges and the behavior of automated software becomes increasingly directed by explicit knowledge about resources, gathered from disparate sources, the need for a standardized means of sharing authoritative knowledge about a given resource, based solely on the URI denoting that resource, becomes critical to achieving a fully open, global, scalable, and ubiquitous Semantic Web. ]] I agree this is an important point, as the Web* is built on HTTP+URIs and the Semantic Web seems so far only to have got to URIs. There have been efforts such as RDDL [2] to cover the query/GET side in a manner that would be suitable for both the current Web and the Semantic Web. As Joshua suggests, it's probably a bit late to earmark slashes or hashes for the purpose. But is the query side enough? I'm personally not comfortable with URIQA's approach, addition of new HTTP verbs - it's a nice technical solution, but I'd worry about deployment. But maybe we do need something you could loosely describe as the RDF Protocol for description-oriented actions (covering the ASK, TELL kind of agent language, as expressed in HTTP as GET, PUT etc). But if the query side is enough then presumably (as you suggest) the solution may well lie in the SPARQL protocol. Cheers, Danny. *Ok, as danbri has been saying on the Atom list, the "Web" as we know it can be characterized in other ways, and isn't necessarily HTTP-specific. But as the primary protocol at this point in time, it should probably be taken into consideration... [1] http://sw.nokia.com/uriqa/URIQA.html [2] http://www.rddl.org/ -- http://dannyayers.com
Received on Friday, 1 April 2005 21:36:18 UTC