- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@miscoranda.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 16:55:58 +0000
- To: "David Booth" <dbooth@hp.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On Dec 3, 2007 8:39 PM, David Booth <dbooth@hp.com> wrote: > I think the Semantic Web's use of URIs and HTTP is *layered* on > top of the old-fashioned Web's use of URIs and HTTP. If that were so, we could use any HTTP URI to refer to any resource if we wanted to. The only reason I'm aware that we cannot is because of the interpretation of the "network resources" passage in RFC 2616. I've never seen a compelling reason why we must disambiguate between information resources and non-information resources using HTTP responses. What are the intrinsic properties of information resources that are so important that all Semantic Web HTTP user-agents *must* be told whether a resource is an information resource or not? Why can't that information just be garnered from whatever RDF the Semantic Web agent has to hand? That's all it can do for every single other property of a resource. Generally if I request an HTTP URI and it sends me back some RDF giving properties of the resource denoted by the URI, I take that as authoritative. Why do we need this weird implicit and useless classing via HTTP responses? -- Sean B. Palmer, http://inamidst.com/sbp/
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2007 17:02:57 UTC