On 12/3/14 7:13 AM, Daniel Vila Suero wrote:
My understanding is that an agent should only use the Location to retrieve more data (a representation of a resource). Given a canonical URI to name the entity (http://datos.bne.es/resource/XX1000054), an agent can try to dereference it, asking for a concrete representation that he understands (e.g., turtle) and what it gets back is a LOCATION with a Turtle representation of the entity in question, that it's described in terms of canonical URIs (e.g., http://datos.bne.es/resource/XX1000054 a frbr:Person; rdfs:label "Richard"). The agent then can follow his nose using these URIs to retrieve more data (in the RDF representations we only use canonical URIs not Locations).We have tried to follow existing best practices (ISA guidelines [1] mention for example the pattern /id/ --> /doc/), but we are open to suggestions from the community on how to improve content-negotiation mechanisms because our goal is to make the data useful for application developers.
Here is a Vapor Report [1]. Hopefully, it sheds light on this matter:[1] http://bit.ly/spanish-national-library-sample-entity-uri-report -- Vapour Report to shows whats happening (conclusion: nothing wrong).
-- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
