On Jul 21, 2006, at 11:38 AM, Xiaoshu Wang wrote:
notwithstanding, I'd rather know that I am dealing with a
non-information resource *before* I touch the network.
I am very puzzled, how can you tell a IR or non-IR given any URI,
unless you
have the knowledge about all URI before hand? Don't you have to
de-reference the URI at first hand? '
If you have an ontology, typically the URI is the subject of many
triples. I assume that some of those triples tell you something about
what would happen if you dereference the URI.
You are right in the sense that if I receive a naked URI in the email
I'll have to dereference it to learn something about it. OTOH, this is
not the case I am thinking about. I am more concerned with URIs that I
find in a SW context - namely part of a graph - a packet of SW
information in some message. I expect my ontology to be clear about
such things as whether a thing is an information resource or not.
So my proposal suggests a class that defines ways of transforming
the URI you find in a SW document into URLs that get specific types of
information.
I would also be cautious about that. This seems to be similar to what
the
web service is doing. I hope we don't try to reinvent the wheel,
especially
it isn't a small wheel to invent by any means.
Not sure what you mean here. The intention was to provide a mechanism
for indirection similar to what is desired by the LSID spec, but
explicitly represented in the same way I represent the rest of my SW
content, rather than by using another network protocol, like the LSID,
DNS, etc.
-Alan
