On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 09:15, Jonathan Rochkind <rochkind_at_jhu.edu> wrote:
> If RDF/linked data really DOES require that servers receive fragment
> identifiers and determine request disposition based upon them, it would be a
> big problem, since that conflicts with the operant RFC's for URI's and for
> the HTTP protocol; and (consequently) with the behavior of many/most user
> agents, servers, and middle ware components.
>
> I'm hoping it doesn't, and that Alex's opinion isn't shared widely in the
> RDF/linked data community.
Well, this *is* a bigger problem than what we might at first think,
because a *huge* part of the mechanics of RDF is dereferencing (see my
other apology post), and most frameworks use proxies to harvest
identities. So when this happens, the fragment identifier is hugely
important and cannot be overlooked. It's gone from the client-side to
the server-side, and I can only suspect that I got the virus through
this notion. Hmm.
Alex
--
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
--- http://shelter.nu/blog/ ----------------------------------------------
------------------ http://www.google.com/profiles/alexander.johannesen ---
Received on Thu Nov 12 2009 - 17:32:12 EST