- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 01:50:22 -0400
- To: "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>
- Cc: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>, Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>, "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>, W3C-TAG Group WG <www-tag@w3.org>, jarcc Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Hi David, > 1. URI declaration: http://dbooth.org/2007/uri-decl/ Some questions about declarations: - It looks like declarations are for individuals. Otherwise I am confused about what the declaration for a class would be. "A URI declaration is authoritative only in defining the association between the declared URI and a particular resource". Is the class an information resource? If not, what is it, and how does one create the association? - You write that "the other hand, statement M3 ("For more information about http://dbooth.org/2007/moon/ , see also http:// dbooth.org/2007/moon/about.html") is safe to include in the URI declaration page, because it is merely a suggestion: it does not affect the satisfiability of p(x).". How are we to determine which statements are of this kind - namely that they do not affect the satisfiability of p(x). - The following: "If the URI contains a fragment identifier, then the racine of the URI (i.e., the part before the #) should lead to a suitable URI declaration page" would seem to imply that there should not be more than one hash identifier with the same racine, unless they denote the same resource. Do I have this correct? - In the statement: "Proposed rule R1: Given a URI u, if either of the follow-your-nose mechanisms described above yields a representation r, then, unless otherwise indicated, the conjunction of assertions made in r represents an implicit URI declaration for u", how are we to know whether the yield is a representation, and how would we indicate that the conjunction of assertions does not represent an implicit URI declaration for u? - Suppose I have a document, and wish to indicate that there is another version of that document with a different URI. How can I do this using the mechanism you propose? Or, where *am* I able to say that the moon is made of green cheese. - Is there any status given to statements that are contained in a document served with a 200 response that is not accessed via the follow-your-nose algorithm? If so, how do I know which ones? - The declaration would necessarily use URIs that are defined by others. Suppose the declaration of one of those uris is changed, either purposefully or inadvertently. Can that change the authoritative association of URI to resource that use these externally defined terms in its declaration? If yes, then does that not undermine the authority of the declarer? If not, how is one able to become aware of this unfortunate situation? -Alan
Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2007 05:50:36 UTC