- From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:52:29 -0400
- To: Leo Sauermann <leo.sauermann@gnowsis.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Leo Sauermann <leo.sauermann@gnowsis.com> wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > (cc Cygri because ... you know... old times) > > I and Cygri were editors of: > http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/ > > The documents overlap, you can reference the cooluris TR for many of the # > -vs 303 aspects. > In fact, you should, because we were in contact with TAG and others back in > 2007/2008 when > we edited the document, and it contains most of the stuff related to > httpRange-14 Yes, I should have referenced it. This was an oversight for which I apologize. > What misses in tr/cooluris is the predicate connecting a document to its uri > > The trick is to have a triple that connects a conceptual thing to a > document, > what you have in point 3.2 in the issue57: > http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/awwsw/issue57/20110625/#cite-source > > Takin the EQ018 example, the trick is to encode the link from #EQ018 to the > document and vice versa. > I have no definitive answer, but I have the gut feeling that it needs to be > defined on the level of RDFS, > because rdfs:isDefinedBy is semantically close. > > foaf:primaryTopic and foaf:primaryTopicOf are also close. I've been thinking about this quite a bit, and the semantics are indeed sort of tricky, as you acknowledge through your use of the word "close". I will put some more thought into it and maybe suggest something next time around. Best Jonathan > so to sum up: > * try to quote the TR/Cooluris/ as much as you can because it was very > heavily peer reviewed by TAG and IvanHerman and others. > * suggest something for the thing-doc relation, my 2c are above. > > > thats it from me, not more I can contribute. > > best > Leo > > It was Jonathan Rees who said at the right time 25.06.2011 18:12 the > following words: > > Comments solicited: "Providing and discovering definitions of URIs" > > (message being sent to www-tag, bcc: public-lod and semantic-web) > > As most of you know, the 9-year-old "httpRange-14" turf war is an > annoyance and embarrassment in efforts to develop RDF, linked data, > the Semantic Web, and Web architecture. > > As a step toward getting closure I've prepared a document (with > the help of the TAG and the AWWSW task group): > > http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/awwsw/issue57/20110625/ > > which attempts to record the variety of approaches that have been > offered. I have attempted to record in a neutral way all the main > proposals that have been put forth and present them in a way that > permits them to be compared. I'm sure I have failed to be completely > neutral, but if so I'm confident you will tell me. > > How to actually get closure is yet to be determined, but a first step > might be to get all the relevant information collected in this > document so that we all know what the issues and opportunities are. > > This document is for informational purposes only and its future is > not yet determined. I would have polished it a bit more but given > current debate on www-tag and public-lod I felt it was more important > to get it out than to tie up loose ends. > > Please comment on the www-tag@w3.org list. I will revise the document > based on comments received. > > If you wish to review the debate please see > http://www.w3.org/wiki/HttpRange14Webography > > Best > Jonathan > > Abstract > > The specification governing Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) > [rfc3986] allows URIs to mean anything at all, and this unbounded > flexibility is exploited in a variety contexts, notably the Semantic > Web and Linked Data. To use a URI to mean something, an agent (a) > selects a URI, (b) provides a definition of the URI in a manner that > permits discovery by agents who encounter the URI, and (c) uses the > URI. Subsequently other agents may not only understand the URI (by > discovering and consulting the definition) but may also use the URI > themselves. > > A few widely known methods are in use to help agents provide and > discover URI definitions, including RDF fragment identifier resolution > and the HTTP 303 redirect. Difficulties in using these methods have > led to a search for new methods that are easier to deploy, and perform > better, than the established ones. However, some of the proposed > methods introduce new problems, such as incompatible changes to the > way metadata is written. This report brings together in one place > information on current and proposed practices, with analysis of > benefits and shortcomings of each. > > The purpose of this report is not to make recommendations but rather > to initiate a discussion that might lead to consensus on the use of > current and/or new methods. > > (this is TAG ISSUE-57 / ACTION-579) > > > -- > Leo Sauermann, Dr. > CEO and Founder > > mail: leo.sauermann@gnowsis.com > mobile: +43 6991 gnowsis > > Where your things come together, > Join: http://www.gnowsis.com/about/content/newsletter > Follow: http://twitter.com/Refinder > Like: http://www.facebook.com/Refinder > Learn: http://www.gnowsis.com/about/blog > Try: http://www.getrefinder.com/accounts/register/ > ____________________________________________________ >
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2011 15:52:57 UTC