Hi all,
This is a cool stuff, indeed.
I think an interesting use case would be to dig into a link to use its
href URI instead of its text. Because let's face it, the web contains
much more links with human-readable labels than plain URIs in the body
of a page...
I'm affraid my poor knowledge of
Hi Hugh,
interesting suggestion; I have also been frustrated with dbpedia URIs in
the adress bar, which you have to (or forget to) change when you want to
feed them to an RDF agent...
However, 406 seems to be the most appropriate answer to give. Falling
back to 301 in too many different
Hi again,
thinking twice about my answer...
If you follow my suggestion, for example, to the query
GET /foo.html HTTP/1.1
Accept: text/turtle
you would answer
HTTP/1.1 406 Not acceptable
Content-type: text/turtle
@prefix : http://example.com/some_vocab .
/foo.html :represents
(Sorry, I should have given the URI of the document I quoted from:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616.)
Yes.
Many thanks.
I had looked for just the response you describe from dbpedia, and decided
that the (since it didn't suggest the rdf URI), it probably wasn't something
that was done.
And even
Hugh,
On 23 Mar 2010, at 22:50, Hugh Glaser wrote:
Assuming that we are in the usual situation of http://foo/bar doing
a 303 to
http://foo/bar.rdf when it gets a Accept: application/rdf+xml http://foo/bar
what should a server do when it gets a request for
Accept: application/rdf+xml
Hi All,
After much thought recently I've taken the following approach (please do
negate the fact I'm using .html etc in examples, it's only for clarity
in this email).
Suppose I have a real world object:
http://example.com/resource/London
and then an html and rdf description
forgot to mention.. if you have the following urls:
http://example.com/resource/London
http://example.com/descriptions/London.html
http://example.com/descriptions/London.rdf
then you can simply enable multiviews for apache and 303
/resource/London through to /descriptions/London, and apache
To abuse an overused quote: And now you have two problems.
Firstly, you have an additional kitten (URI) to pay for with the
descriptions resource in addition to the other URIs.
Secondly, the semantics of your descriptions resource are unclear. Is it an
information resource or not? Is it a
On Mar 24, 2010, at 09:13 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
Hugh,
On 23 Mar 2010, at 22:50, Hugh Glaser wrote:
Assuming that we are in the usual situation of http://foo/bar doing a 303 to
http://foo/bar.rdf when it gets a Accept: application/rdf+xml http://foo/bar
what should a server do when
Hello!
We are in the process of rolling out some links to DBpedia over in BBC
Programmes. However, we are facing a small issue. We use our own
categorisation scheme based on SKOS, and then want to add some sameAs
links to DBpedia.
For example, we currently publish the following statements:
Nathan wrote:
Robert Sanderson wrote:
To abuse an overused quote: And now you have two problems.
Firstly, you have an additional kitten (URI) to pay for with the
descriptions resource in addition to the other URIs.
Secondly, the semantics of your descriptions resource are unclear. Is it an
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Yves Raimond yves.raim...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello!
We are in the process of rolling out some links to DBpedia over in BBC
Programmes. However, we are facing a small issue. We use our own
categorisation scheme based on SKOS, and then want to add some sameAs
Is that an issue? Should we drop SKOS altogether if we go on with
that, or should we use skos:exactMatch instead of owl:sameAs?
see also http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/term_focus
I'm running out of excuses for not having added this already...
Great, thanks for the link!
However, I'd like
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Yves Raimond yves.raim...@gmail.com wrote:
Is that an issue? Should we drop SKOS altogether if we go on with
that, or should we use skos:exactMatch instead of owl:sameAs?
see also http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/term_focus
I'm running out of excuses for not
Is that an issue? Should we drop SKOS altogether if we go on with
that, or should we use skos:exactMatch instead of owl:sameAs?
see also http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/term_focus
I'm running out of excuses for not having added this already...
Great, thanks for the link!
However, I'd like
Hi Nathan,
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Nathan nat...@webr3.org wrote:
Robert Sanderson wrote:
Secondly, the semantics of your descriptions resource are unclear. Is it
an
information resource or not? Is it a conceptual set of all of the
formats
of the descriptions of the original
Hi all
see also http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/term_focus
However, I'd like to understand why a sameAs would be bad here, I have
the intuition it might be, but am really not sure. It looks to me like
there's no resource out there that couldn't be a SKOS concept as well
(you may want
Hi Ted,
On 24 Mar 2010, at 15:31, Ted Thibodeau Jr wrote:
If I ask for application/rdf+xml representation of http://foo/
bar.html,
you *SHOULD NOT* 200 OK and give me text/html *unless* you are also
and
simultaneously providing a list of other alternatives (not formatted
here as it would be
Robert Sanderson wrote:
Hi Nathan,
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Nathan nat...@webr3.org wrote:
Robert Sanderson wrote:
Secondly, the semantics of your descriptions resource are unclear. Is it
an
information resource or not? Is it a conceptual set of all of the
formats
of the
Thanks guys - I may be getting lost here :-)
Some comments.
Richard, I'm not sure why you see it is a UI problem.
(Remember - LD is about machine-processable data.)
The only UI that might be involved is the web browser that was used to view
the original LD.
If you meant that, then yes, it is; the
20 matches
Mail list logo
