Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
In the interest of clarification, the reason that some of us advocate
*not* putting several resources in one file using fragments is that it
then becomes difficult to serve (standard web) pages that give only
information about one resource, because the server doesn't see the
fragment id.
Yes, if you want one thing described per file, then describe one thing
per file, if you want two things described per file, then don't be
surprised when that file describes two things, rather than one.
This may be only a minor frustration in cases where only
a handful of resources are described in a single file, but is
devastating when the resource contains many. For example I work with
the NCBI Taxonomy, which currently names species using the fragid. As
the file is > 200M you can imagine that it hurts when I put such a URI
into my browser and all 200+M starts coming back.
Indeed, hence the original email, several hundred million (!!) resources
in one file is definitely *not* a good idea, and using fragments in no
way suggests, indicates, or infers that you should do this, or that this
would be a wise move.
ps: several != 200+M
-Alan
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Nathan <nat...@webr3.org> wrote:
All,
For some reason I keep hearing people inferring that if you use fragments
you must for some reason put all your descriptions of things / resources in
a single "file".
I'd just like to confirm that couldn't be further from the truth if it
tried.
/resources/Foo
/resources/Bar
/resources/Baz
/Foo#t
/Bar#t
/Baz#t
However, with #fragments you can *optionally* put the description of one or
more "things" in a single "file"
/things#foo
/things#bar
/Baz#t
Fragments allow you to be as verbose or as terse as you like with your data.
This is particularly useful for logically grouping related resources, for
instance in ones FOAF profile you may have:
/bob#me
/bob#certificate
/bob#assistant
But you most certainly are not constrained to putting the descriptions of
all your things in one "file", that's about as ridiculous as it sounds.
Best,
Nathan
