W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-awwsw@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Meeting today (Jan 4)?

From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 10:01:05 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTik6h7kyhYCfNOb9PPZCTLYi8SURFPcpDvk7rCe2@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Cc: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 8:31 AM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote:
> Are we meeting today?


> If so, do you have anything drafted for us to
> read?


What I have been working on: A vocabulary list, similar to
http://esw.w3.org/AwwswVocabulary but attempting to create a
relatively coherent system. I'm trying out an exposition that proceeds
in two phases, the first being a "naive web architecture" in which
(info) resources and 'representations' are the same, and explaining
resource properties such as dc:creator in terms of that; then
explaining why this doesn't work, and a second phase to explain how to
distinguish the two without sacrificing the benefits of the naive
model (i.e. the ability to deduce properties of (info) resources).  I
don't know if this will work, but it's my latest shot at the
httpRange-14 problem. (If you can deduce nontrivial properties of an
info resource from its representations, and those properties are
properties that people never have, then an info resource cannot be a
person; this still leaves the freedom to reject the premises but at
least the argument will make sense - which it doesn't now.)

What I'm finding helpful, as I think we discussed before, is to give
each definition (class or property) an 'accession number' that is
stable across drafts, then list all the competing labels we've
considered for these these definitions. (For example for label
'representation' we have both the bits-in-transit definition and the
bits-in-many-caches definitions.) Once we get the definitions and
axioms into a satisfactory form we can decide on URIs and then we'll
have the 'ontology'...

Next TAG F2F is Feb 8-10, so it would be nice to have something ready
by Feb 1. I've got a about 3 other things going on but will try to get
something to you well before the 1st.


> On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 13:52 +0000, Jonathan Rees wrote:
>> No call today (apparently), but I am continuing to work on a document
>> more or less following the plan I posted before. I do keep getting
>> snarled in the same old issues (e.g. the apparent contradiction
>> between HTTP authority vs. URIs as names for 'documents'; the apparent
>> inconsistency between what happens "in the wild" on the web, vs. 2xx
>> relating to "information resources") but am plugging away. We should
>> meet when I have something to review, which should be some time in
>> January, probably later rather than earlier as I have a Jan 15
>> deadline on another project.
>> Jonathan
> --
> David Booth, Ph.D.
> http://dbooth.org/
> Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
> reflect those of his employer.
Received on Tuesday, 4 January 2011 15:02:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:21:08 UTC