Re: RDF Update Feeds + URI time travel on HTTP-level

2009-11-22 Thread Danny Ayers
2009/11/22 Richard Cyganiak rich...@cyganiak.de: On 20 Nov 2009, at 19:07, Chris Bizer wrote: [snips] From a web architecture POV it seems pretty solid to me. Doing stuff via headers is considered bad if you could just as well do it via links and additional URIs, but you can argue that the

Re: RDF Update Feeds + URI time travel on HTTP-level

2009-11-22 Thread Damian Steer
On 22 Nov 2009, at 09:39, Danny Ayers wrote: 2009/11/22 Richard Cyganiak rich...@cyganiak.de: On 20 Nov 2009, at 19:07, Chris Bizer wrote: [snips] From a web architecture POV it seems pretty solid to me. Doing stuff via headers is considered bad if you could just as well do it via links

Re: RDF Update Feeds + URI time travel on HTTP-level

2009-11-22 Thread Nathan
Damian Steer wrote: On 22 Nov 2009, at 09:39, Danny Ayers wrote: 2009/11/22 Richard Cyganiak rich...@cyganiak.de: On 20 Nov 2009, at 19:07, Chris Bizer wrote: [snips] From a web architecture POV it seems pretty solid to me. Doing stuff via headers is considered bad if you could just as

Re: RDF Update Feeds + URI time travel on HTTP-level

2009-11-22 Thread Kingsley Idehen
Nathan wrote: Damian Steer wrote: On 22 Nov 2009, at 09:39, Danny Ayers wrote: 2009/11/22 Richard Cyganiak rich...@cyganiak.de: On 20 Nov 2009, at 19:07, Chris Bizer wrote: [snips] From a web architecture POV it seems pretty solid to me. Doing stuff via

Re: RDF Update Feeds + URI time travel on HTTP-level

2009-11-22 Thread Herbert Van de Sompel
hi all, (thanks Chris, Richard, Danny) In light of the current discussion, I would like to provide some clarifications regarding Memento: Time Travel for the Web, ie the idea of introducing HTTP content negotiation in the datetime dimension: (*) Some extra pointers: - For those who

Re: RDF Update Feeds + URI time travel on HTTP-level

2009-11-22 Thread Herbert Van de Sompel
[tried to send this before but somehow did not get through to list] hi all, (thanks Chris, Richard, Danny) In light of the current discussion, I would like to provide some clarifications regarding Memento: Time Travel for the Web, ie the idea of introducing HTTP content negotiation in the

Re: RDF Update Feeds + URI time travel on HTTP-level

2009-11-22 Thread Mark Baker
Hi Chris, On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Chris Bizer ch...@bizer.de wrote: Hi Michael, Georgi and all, just to complete the list of proposals, here another one from Herbert Van de Sompel from the Open Archives Initiative. Memento: Time Travel for the Web http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.1112

Re: RDF Update Feeds + URI time travel on HTTP-level

2009-11-22 Thread Peter Ansell
2009/11/23 Mark Baker dist...@acm.org: Hi Chris, On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Chris Bizer ch...@bizer.de wrote: Hi Michael, Georgi and all, just to complete the list of proposals, here another one from Herbert Van de Sompel from the Open Archives Initiative. Memento: Time Travel for

Re: RDF Update Feeds + URI time travel on HTTP-level

2009-11-22 Thread Mark Baker
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Peter Ansell ansell.pe...@gmail.com wrote: It should be up to resource creators to determine when the nature of a resource changes across time. A web architecture that requires every single edit to have a different identifier is a large hassle and likely won't

Re: RDF Update Feeds + URI time travel on HTTP-level

2009-11-22 Thread Peter Ansell
2009/11/23 Mark Baker dist...@acm.org: On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Peter Ansell ansell.pe...@gmail.com wrote: It should be up to resource creators to determine when the nature of a resource changes across time. A web architecture that requires every single edit to have a different