Phil Archer wrote:
Martin seems to be fighting a lone battle, but fwiw I'll add my +1 to
his comments.
I do take the point that, in context, it's really nice if rdfs:seeAlso
gives a URI that provides more data in RDF and many applications will
make that assumption. But to /rely/ on that every time seems at odds
with the, AIUI fundamental notion, that a URI is an identifier and no more.
I'd say that if you see an rdfs:seeAlso property, sure, send an HTTP
request, but do it with a suitable accept header. If you get a 200,
great, add the data, but be ready to deal with a 406 (I've got it but
not in the format you have specified in your request).
Describing a URI with further triples is good, nothing wrong with that,
but to use that to decide whether or not to dereference an rdfs:seeAlso
URI means looking for a description of the linked resource and then
acting accordingly. That sounds like a relatively heavy bit of
processing that HTTP kind of takes care of for you.
So then if you use { S rdfs:seeAlso O } then O is used with a
dereferencable http/https scheme URI which deferences to an information
resource with a representation in any format which may or may not have
something to do with the subject of the triple.
Apologies, previously I'd thought the O was a name which you'd look for
in the subject position of other statements. (as in, any RDF URI
Reference, any scheme, or any blank node).
Best,
Nathan
