Re: Confusion on httpRange-14 decision (fragmentInXML-28, RDFinXHTML-35, abstractComponentRefs-37)

On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 14:24 -0500, Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)
>  To: The TAG
>  From: The Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment Working Group
> Is it okay to have the same URI identify both a location within an HTML
> document and a concept in an ontology?  What is the class of
> "information resources"?  Would the TAG wish to define a URI for it?  Is
> it owl:disjointWith anything?  What can be concluded if an HTTP response
> code is other than 2xx, 4xx or 303?

To re-iterate what I said in another mailing list:

I don't think the TAG endorses what I'm doing there.

The most relevant TAG issues are still open.

I'm starting to think that the profile attribute is key:
if you get an HTML representation of /baseballplayers
with <div id="peterose"> then baseballplayers#peterose
identifies that div element, unless the author says otherwise
using the <head profile> element.

This is a post-hoc refinement of the html media types
and the XHTML specs; i.e. I think those specs should
be ammendmended to specify this practice.
  Fri, 03 Feb 2006 08:41:30 -0600

I think the questions you ask are interesting, David, but
httpRange-14 is closed and I don't see much motivation to
re-open it. Better to connect this discussion to other issues.

Dan Connolly, W3C
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2006 23:43:20 UTC