Jeni:
At the end of 4.3 where you mention Link Header, please add a reference to the
Link Header RFC.
I think a bit more discussion about the use of Link Header would be good but
your call.
All the best, Ashok
On 7/11/2013 4:49 AM, Jeni Tennison wrote:
Dear public-lod, RDF WG,
Some of you will have seen that the First Public Working Draft of "URLs in
Data" has been published by the TAG [1].
This document is the outcome of the call for change proposals [2] for the TAG's
2005 decision on httpRange-14 [3].
The document purposefully does not address the issue of what a URI 'identifies'
or how to discover additional information about it (beyond best practice that
has been documented elsewhere). It aims instead to clarify the circumstances in
which different communities of practice may draw different conclusions about
the content of a document on the web, and how to avoid this by having clear
definitions for the properties you use when publishing data that uses URIs.
For RDF and linked data, the implication is that applications should focus on
the statements that are being asserted about a given URI in the data that they
have (from whatever source) to determine what to do. To avoid misinterpretation
and misuse, and particularly where there's the possibility of ambiguity (eg
'license' or 'creator'), vocabulary authors should state whether a given
property applies to the content retrieved from the subject URI or to something
that content describes.
The TAG does not intend to work further on these issues in the immediate
future, except to respond to and integrate comments on this document. Please
send any comments on the document to [email protected].
Cheers,
Jeni
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/urls-in-data/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/uddp/change-proposal-call.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Jun/0039.html
