- From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 14:37:13 -0700
- To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 1:39 PM > To: Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com > Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: Re: D-AG0009; Semantic Web & Web architecture > > I've given the example of the 410 response code, which is a way for a > resource to tell a client that it was purposefully removed. This is > "semantic", because a client, even one without a human nearby, knows > what that means. A "non-semantic" version would be a 200 > response with a body saying "oops, sorry, gone" - > a machine would have no chance of > understanding that, though a human would. Nice explanation/analogy. I would be happy to see something like this as a strong requirement for a Web Architecture -- that it encourage "controlled vocabularies", whether textual or numeric, that machines can use to process "semantic" information from messages and results. > > What Tim means by "The Semantic Web", is to extend those kinds of > transfer-level semantics to the body of the message, where currently > they are mostly limited to the envelope. Well, I can agree in the abstract, but I'd have to see this working in practice before agreeing that it is a strong requirement on the WS arch to support. Anyway, both Mark and I seem to like the term "aligned with" even though we have rather different levels of enthusiasm for the SW initiative.
Received on Monday, 25 March 2002 16:37:54 UTC