Re: Proposal to amend the httpRange-14 resolution

On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Tore Eriksson <> wrote:
> ==Summary==
> This proposal entails a partial reversion of the httpRange-14
> resolution. Specifically, it suggests that a representation retrieved
> from a HTTP URI will never* be equivalent to what the URI denotes (the
> resource), but will always be a description (of the state) of the
> resource, eliminating the risk of confusing a resource with its
> description.

In this case I think you need to add to "negative effects" that
referential use of URIs for which there is no available descriptive
information is deprecated. There are many such uses of URIs in extant
RDF, so I think this would be a problem.

I'm not sure how one would write (in RDF), say, Dublin Core metadata
for the document (wiki page) that is accessed from , since that URI has no
discoverable RDF. What would you advise people do, should your change
proposal be accepted? One could define a second URI to refer to this
document, but what descriptive RDF would one write in order to
document the new URI?


Received on Monday, 26 March 2012 01:12:44 UTC