- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 12:33:18 -0500
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Jul 2, 2009, at 10:14 PM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Dan Brickley<danbri@danbri.org> wrote: >> On 2/7/09 22:50, Pat Hayes wrote: >>> >>> On Jul 2, 2009, at 3:42 PM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Dan Brickley<danbri@danbri.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello TAG, >>>>> >>>>> Talking with some SW folk about OpenID, and whether my >>>>> "me-the-person" URI >>>>> could be practically usable as my OpenID, I came up with this >>>>> corner-case: >>>>> >>>>> Could http://danbri.org be a URI for "me the person", and >>>>> http://danbri.org/ >>>>> be a document about me (and also serve as my OpenID)? >>>>> >>>>> As I understand HTTP, any client must request something, so the >>>>> former isn't >>>>> directly de-referencable. The client has to decide to ask for / >>>>> from >>>>> danbri.org instead. But they're still different URIs, aren't they? >>>>> >>>>> Is... >>>>> >>>>> <Person xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1"/ >>>>> rdf:about="http://danbri.org"> >>>>> <openid> >>>>> <Document rdf:about="http://danbri.org/"/> >>>>> </openid> >>>>> </Person> >>>>> >>>>> ...at all feasible? I guess it depends on how exactly we think >>>>> about the >>>>> "add a / to the end" step... >>>> >>>> >>>>> From an RDF point of view the URI strings are different means that >>>> >>>> they can denote different things. >>>> >>>> I guess the question I have about this is: Why be so "clever"? >>> >>> I think I can answer that. Because people are. In fact, people use >>> the >>> same name for a person and the person's website and the person's >>> name, >>> etc., often without even noticing that they are doing it, and >>> certainly >>> without falling into instant incoherence or having their brains >>> catch >>> fire. But our inference engines can't handle this kind of >>> ambiguity, at >>> present. So it would be handy if a notational convention could be >>> adopted that allowed the dumb machinery to keep its prissy >>> distinctions >>> distinct, while allowing human readers to be sloppy without even >>> noticing that they are being sloppy. This idea is an elegant step in >>> that direction, if it can be made to work. >>> >>> This might not be danbri's motivation, but it is why the idea >>> appeals to >>> me :-) >> >> That's pretty much it. I somehow feel awkward when "normal" Web >> folk are in >> the practice of putting URIs for their homepage and blogs into >> business >> cards and email sigs, while SemWeb folk put URIs "for themselves >> not their >> pages", > > Perhaps this is too clever too. Something on a business card is going > to be typed into a browser window. Seems to me that it is perfectly > reasonable to expect it is a bona fide web page. Seems reasonable that when typed into a browser window, you will **get to see** a webpage, yes. But if I have a name on my business card, seems to me that the obvious assumption is that this name **refers to** the person. And the clever thing about this is that you can have it both ways, without anyone noticing. Also, BTW, if this notational convention about the trailing / can be made to work, then it provides a vastly easier way of handling the http-range-14 issue than the current recommended practice, one that I bet any 6-year-old could grok in a few minutes. A great deal of the name ambiguity on the Web seems to be this confusion of thing with web-document-about-thing, and if we could handle all of that with this simple a convention, I'm all for it. Pat > At this stage of the > game, it seems to me that the proper thing is to explain on the web > page a bit about this semweb stuff and there include a URI that > denotes the person themselves, explaining why it's important. (if it's > important enough to put on your business card instead of the usual > thing, it's important enough to introduce the idea clearly on your > home page, and probably more effective too). > > -Alan > > which are usually somewhat different and contain random different >> punctuation like prefixing "me-as-me" to the domain name, or "#me" >> to the >> end of the URI. This convention means that - for those prepared to >> actually >> buy a domain name - there is essentially one thing to remember and >> not two, >> and that the "with / it's a doc, without it's a person" can be a re- >> usable, >> memorable pattern. >> >> cheers, >> >> Dan >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 3 July 2009 17:33:59 UTC