On 8 Aug 2007, at 15:30, Xiaoshu Wang wrote:
Chimezie,
The employee wants to build an ontology and doesn't have control over
web space. She considers using the tag scheme instead of an HTTP
scheme
(with a bogus domain name such as
http://example.com/clinical-medicine/surgical-procedures#minimally-
invasive-procedure) because the latter scenario would result in
the use of the HTTP scheme which incorrectly suggests (to "follow-
you-nose Semantic Web agents" - there is growing number of such
software) that they attempt to unnecessarily dereference the terms
for more 'useful' information.
But this is a "pyschological" issue, not a "technical one".
[snip]
Psychological issues *are* technical. Think HCI or accessibility.
And they are certainly *HUGELY* technical in the case of name design.
We want to encourage the right amount of naming, not *too* much; that
they are shareable and actually shared; etc. etc. etc.
Oh, and this is a "best practices" document, ergo, social-
psychological issues are typically at the forefront :)
(I don't agree with your analysis even after this. For example, one
reason she might care about FYN semantic web agents is that it might
be a reasoner that does *different* things when fed an HTTP uri
(tries to dereference) and a URN (er...doesn't). And of course we can
work out compensations for that, but c'mon. We're talking about trade
offs and work arounds, not "can you make it work if you try hard
enough.")
Cheers,
Bijan.
