[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] implementation issues for ontology URIs (right forum

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@xxxxxx>, Jonathan Rees <jar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Rick Murphy <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2008 14:35:26 -0400
Message-id: <48E908EE.3040005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Oct 4, 2008, at 2:46 AM, paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> Cool thanks
>>> it renders well in firefox without extension
>>> but I am not sure understand how one uri can be viewed both as rdf
>>> source and html
>> It is resolved by 'content negotiation', a similar technique used for
>> example to decide which language version you get of a multi-language-
>> edition newspaper. To regard these editions as a single resource is
>> considered good Web practice according to the W3C Architectural
>> guidelines, but the extension of this to the HTML/RDF distinction is
>> currently more controversial. So this might be good practice,
>> depending on how the current debates about RDF and content negotiation
>> finally settle out. In the meantime one should probably treat it as
>> provisionally good practice, or maybe experimental good practice.
> Ahem.
> There is not a whiff of content negotiation, which I don't like
> because it makes it confusing to figure out what resource the URI
> names. I do not consider using content negotiation good practice, even
> provisionally.    (01)

Content negotiation can be an effective practice given a model theoretic 
semantics based on pragmaticism. Given that we can't constrain behavior 
on the web, the key point is to align model theory and practice. I 
certainly defer to Pat on this issue, but I believe the recent 
developments in linked data, specifically the introduction of 
information and non-information resources, imply a need to update the 
current RDF model theory to reflect a vocabulary that differentiates 
things, things in the world and references to things in the world. 
Pragamticism and content negotiation could come later, like after semiotics.    (02)

> The specific series of events that happens when the browser does a get
> of http://purl.obofoundry.org/obo/OBI_0000225    (03)

snip ...    (04)

> For those that might think that this looks like a lot of traffic to
> generate the page, I'll remind that there are a variety of ways that
> this same information can be retrieved much more efficiently, for
> example the whole OBI OWL file
> (http://purl.obofoundry.org/obo/obi.owl), or as a query against the
> Neurocommons triple store at http://sparql.neurocommons.org/ .    (05)

Information and non-information resources can be effectively 
differentiated without network traffic. Would you mind explaining how 
you believe the introduction of network traffic better differentiate 
information and non-information resources ?    (06)

> For the
> single dereference of a citable name, we consider it more important
> that we try as best possible to not confuse what the URI denotes, and
> to have systems in place that reduce as much as possible the chance
> that there be incentive to give another name (URI) for the same
> entity.    (07)

So how does network traffic clarify what the URI denotes ?    (08)

You seem to be saying that linked data implies a disincentive for 
introducing new representations, but this requires that consumers of 
representations standardize their interpretation.    (09)

I'm a congregationalist which I guess is a bit left of Unitarian these 
days. I suggest our understanding of semantics today is not sufficiently 
mature to introduce disincentives into web architecture in an attempt to 
achieve the web's goals.    (010)

> -Alan
>> Pat
>>> or do we have more than one uri for the same resource? if so, is that
>>> legal/good practice?
>>> thanks
>>> PDM
>>> On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Alan Ruttenberg
>>> <alanruttenberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Whoops, typo: That should be: http://purl.obofoundry.org/obo/OBI_0000225
>>>> Thanks for noticing!
>>>> Note that if you view source, you will see RDF rather than HTML. The
>>>> HTML is browser only, generated by a stylesheet instruction.
>>>> -Alan
>>>> On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 3:19 AM,  <paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> - http://purl.obofoundry.org/obo/OBO_0000225 - an example of what
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> think should be a typical response for an ontology term
>>>>> Alan, when click on that url with firefox i get redirected to
>>>>> http://www.berkeleybop.org/ontologies/OBO_0000225
>>>>> and see 'object not found'
>>>>> is this the response to be expecting, or suggesting should be
>>>>> expected?
>>>>> --PDM    (011)

Best Wishes,
Rick    (012)

blog:   http://phaneron.rickmurphy.org
web:    http://www.rickmurphy.org
phone:  703.201.9129    (013)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (014)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>