Hi Richard, 2009/6/25 Richard Cyganiak <rich...@cyganiak.de>:
<snip/> > (On the value of content negotiation in general: I think the key point is > that any linked data URI intended for re-use, when put into a browser by the > average person interested in linked data publishing, MUST return something > human-readable. That's a hard requirement, otherwise people will never be > confident about what a particular URI means and hence they won't re-use. > That was the thinking behind the Cool URIs note when Leo and I wrote it a > few years ago. In the past, the only way to get that effect was with content > negotiation, so even though content negotiation is a pain, it's what we had > to do. In the present, we have an alternative thanks to RDFa. Not disagreeing at all about the human readable requirement, but just a question... in this scenario you describe, is there not a risk that Joe User will enter that URI and come to the conclusion that it identifies the document (or section thereof), rather than a thing described in the document? Interested in your thoughts :) Tom.