- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 03:26:32 -0700
- To: "nathan@webr3.org" <nathan@webr3.org>
- CC: Graham Klyne <GK-lists@ninebynine.org>, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
-----Original Message----- From: Nathan [mailto:nathan@webr3.org] Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 2:32 AM To: Larry Masinter Cc: Graham Klyne; Jonathan Rees; www-tag@w3.org Subject: Re: "tdb" and "duri" URI schemes... Larry Masinter wrote: > Almost all of the use cases for tdb I can think of need a timestamp, > even when the description isn't varying (such as with data:). > agree, but also see a big need for the non-dated semantic indirection on > the web, especially in linked data territories, thus looking for some > way to make that possible, without another 5-10 year lead time. What about having the date optional... so you could say tdb::<uri> if you really don't want to give a timestamp. But I still can't think of a use case. >> And duri with data: doesn't make sense to me. Well, it "makes sense", it just doesn't do anything (unless, I suppose, the data URI scheme were to change?) > Likewise to some extent, however, with duri: > > duri:2010:tdb:data:,The%20US%20president I don't like this much, although I understand it. Just putting the date in tdb:2010:data:,... seems simpler. > and non temporally bound: > tdb:data:,The%20US%20president Can you give a scenario where this would be useful? > Regardless of this though, definitely need fragments in the URIs, > encoded or not. It's just syntactically messy. I'd need to make up some other way of encoding # than %hex. Larry
Received on Friday, 5 November 2010 10:27:00 UTC