- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 01:50:22 -0400
- To: "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>
- Cc: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>, Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>, "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>, W3C-TAG Group WG <www-tag@w3.org>, jarcc Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Hi David,
> 1. URI declaration: http://dbooth.org/2007/uri-decl/
Some questions about declarations:
- It looks like declarations are for individuals. Otherwise I am
confused about what the declaration for a class would be. "A URI
declaration is authoritative only in defining the association between
the declared URI and a particular resource". Is the class an
information resource? If not, what is it, and how does one create the
association?
- You write that "the other hand, statement M3 ("For more
information about http://dbooth.org/2007/moon/ , see also http://
dbooth.org/2007/moon/about.html") is safe to include in the URI
declaration page, because it is merely a suggestion: it does not
affect the satisfiability of p(x).". How are we to determine which
statements are of this kind - namely that they do not affect the
satisfiability of p(x).
- The following: "If the URI contains a fragment identifier, then the
racine of the URI (i.e., the part before the #) should lead to a
suitable URI declaration page" would seem to imply that there should
not be more than one hash identifier with the same racine, unless
they denote the same resource. Do I have this correct?
- In the statement: "Proposed rule R1: Given a URI u, if either of
the follow-your-nose mechanisms described above yields a
representation r, then, unless otherwise indicated, the conjunction
of assertions made in r represents an implicit URI declaration for
u", how are we to know whether the yield is a representation, and how
would we indicate that the conjunction of assertions does not
represent an implicit URI declaration for u?
- Suppose I have a document, and wish to indicate that there is
another version of that document with a different URI. How can I do
this using the mechanism you propose? Or, where *am* I able to say
that the moon is made of green cheese.
- Is there any status given to statements that are contained in a
document served with a 200 response that is not accessed via the
follow-your-nose algorithm? If so, how do I know which ones?
- The declaration would necessarily use URIs that are defined by
others. Suppose the declaration of one of those uris is changed,
either purposefully or inadvertently. Can that change the
authoritative association of URI to resource that use these
externally defined terms in its declaration? If yes, then does that
not undermine the authority of the declarer? If not, how is one able
to become aware of this unfortunate situation?
-Alan
Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2007 05:50:36 UTC