PUBLIC MARKS with tag uri

how do I decide whether a URI is bookmarkable or not?

karl says: Your comment is awaiting moderation. December 2, 2011 at 2:51 pm There is a missing opportunity from both monolingual search engines and content providers. It’s kind of sad. The fact to have one unique URI that a French user can just paste to his Japanese friend is one wonderful thing of content negotiation. How do we leverage this, so search engines are able to understand it? Enter the never used 1998 RFC: “Transparent Content Negotiation in HTTP” (RFC 2295). http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2295 I wonder what it would take for Google to negotiate with content providers and offering this feature. The solution is super simple. We were living in a world where sites were quite monolingual but this has changed since.

Gestion des URL SPIP3 permet la gestion des URL. Une fois modifiées, les anciennes URL redirigent les utilisateurs vers les nouvelles.

He made the mistake of directly coupling his application with the structure of the URIs and ended up breaking his system in the process.

REST URI relative to

here is the proposed sequence of steps in this scenario: clients GET the template and a token from the factory resource. since this operation does not change server state, it is safe and idempotent and it is possible to use GET. clients PUT to the token URI, at which point the server creates and populates the resource at the repository level, and keeps track of the token from which the resource has been created. the server responds with a 303 (See Other) response, indicating the persistent URI of the resource. subsequent requests to the token URIs are handled with a 301 (Moved Permanently) response, telling clients that the token URI should no longer be used, and that a persistent URI is now available.

The Web is not HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. It's not DOM, SVG, WebGL, PNG, or Flash. The Web is really just HTTP over TCP/IP. What gets transported over HTTP does not define the Web. There is, however, one other characteristic that does define the Web, and that is the humble hyperlink.

Again, it’s great for them, but what about for the next lot

Persistence — only mint a new URIs if one doesn’t already exist: once minted, never delete it

on ne peut pas avoir toutes ces propriétés à la fois

The Library of Congress Authorities and Vocabularies service enables both humans and machines to programmatically access authority data at the Library of Congress via URIs.

Nov 27, 2010

karl said...

You said: "URIs have become part of the furniture of the real world, like corporate graffiti tags. I'm typing this on a tube train and every poster at this end of the carriage features a URI in some shape."The metaphor is a little bit off. Basically yes you are right in the physical world (everything is real, the difference is more digital-physical), things change too. The poster in the carriage is content (aka the representation served to you), but this is not the URI. The URI in the carriage in this case is the pointer which led to this poster. It could be for example "carriage XZ345-window AXV" This is the identifier, the URI. The content can change it is no issue. Now the URI helps you to designate and draws an expectation, at this URI, I'm used to read this or that. Example in the physical world. At this address, 123 Smith Street, etc. (URI = identifier), there is a shop (representation) which sells bread. Maybe one day the shop will be replaced by a fisher place and you break the expectation of the usual person coming here. You break URIs when you do not handle it anymore. Exemple an urban architect redesign the city, and the street completely disappears, where one day the street was here, the next year no more than a big factory on what was one day a street. The important is not that the street disappeared, but that the name of the street disappeared. The History books of the city or the streets around could display a 410 Gone (Here was Smith Street).

A l’intérieur du livre, chaque bibliothèque appose un tampon. A la bibliothèque des lettres de la rue d’Ulm, c’était pages 25 et 101 si je me souviens bien. A Paris 8, c’est page 99. L’identité va se nicher dans le numéro…

The first, 'duri' (standing for "dated URI"), allows indicating a URI as of a particular date (and time). This allows explicit reference to the "time of retrieval", similar to the way in which bibliographic references containing URIs are used.

Such identification numbers are relevant only to OGC standard (SFSQL) databases. On the web we identify coordinate systems by URIs. In a Python application, a spatial reference system should be a Python object not an integer pointing to some object outside the environment.

This document specifies a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for geographic locations using the 'geo' scheme name. A 'geo' URI identifies a physical location in a two- or three-dimensional coordinate reference system in a compact, simple, human-readable, and protocol-independent way. The default coordinate reference system used is the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS-84).

As part of this upgrade, the URLs of the openlibrary.org website will change from /a/, /b/, /l/ and /user/ to /authors/, /books/, /languages/ and /people/ respectively. After this change, the old URLs will get redirected to the new ones.

I just like unique identifiers because they make it easy (possible) to connect lots of little pieces in order to create new things, so I figured I would share.

Test for browser redirection handling WRT URI fragments, quick and dirty.

karl says:

March 2, 2010 at 11:07 am

In your paragraph

“one of the axioms of the web that URIs are opaque, and that machines “should not look at the contents of the URI string to gain other information”, but there are lots of ways in which humans don’t follow this principle”

Not only humans in fact. The first item in your list is talking about Google and it has changed a lot the way the Web is made. In commercial environments (aka Web Agencies), SEO (capacity of having a better findability) touches the content organization but also the words in URIs. So often the SEO person will not only recommend the way to architect content in the page, but also the words that must be in the URI. It is basically an additional constraint to the list you created.

* Persistence

* Readability

* Findability

Commentaire obligatoire : je ne suis pas archiviste ;)

Dans le domaine des archives traditionnelles de l'objet matériel, il me semble qu'un des points importants est la duplication : C'est à dire la reproduction à l'identique d'un objet en de nombreux endroits. Cette duplication créé des contraintes (stockage, duplication du travail parfois), mais elle assure aussi une certaine forme de pérennité (réduction de la fragilité, indépendance entre le lieu de l'objet physique et de sa référence dans le modèle).

En revanche le Web propose un identifiant mais pour une copie unique très souvent d'un contenu, ce qui est pratique mais aussi fragile. L'URI en tant qu'identifiant seul et indépendant de sa localisation n'est pas rentré dans les mœurs.

L'autre enjeu aussi est que l'archive Web est un processus continu. Le contenu peut changer en permanence pour un identifiant donné (ce qui a un effet de bord très intéressant sur les lois de protection des contenus.)

Le contenu actuel des bibliothèques peut être rendu disponible et une même œuvre peut avoir plusieurs URIs de localisation et un URI unique d'identification. Et même si celui ci n'est pas unique, ce n'est pas si grave owl:sameAs est là pour cela. Mettre à disposition d'abord et recoller ensuite les morceaux, car le fait que la contrainte de l'espace physique n'existe plus en ligne, le tube de colle est également plus facile à utiliser. Mais j'ai une vue qui est peut-être trop pragmatique.

2 janvier, 2010 - 21:49 — karl