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

Re: summary so far.

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 15:06:48 -0500
To: nathan@webr3.org
Cc: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1299269208.2525.31877.camel@dbooth-laptop>
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 00:03 +0000, Nathan wrote:
[ . . . ]
> The technical issues we need to (and can) address are:
> 
>   - we need a resource description framework (check!)
> a - ensure that wherever possible each URI is used to refer to one 
> distinct thing

I think #a is misleading as written, because it suggests that a URI
either does or does not refer to a distinct thing, and IMO that is
wrong.  Whether a URI refers to a distinct thing depends on the graph
that is being considered, i.e., it depends on the *application*.  A URI
may be unambiguous to one application (using that URI in one graph), but
ambiguous to another (using that same URI in a different graph).  In
fact, in all but a vanishingly few cases, this will be the case.

I think what is needed in #a is to ensure that the semantic web
community agrees on a set of conventions for establishing and
determining resource identity for a given graph.  My writings at
http://dbooth.org/2009/lifecycle/
http://dbooth.org/2010/ambiguity/
are intended in this direction.

> b - ensure that wherever possible we can refer to both information, and 
> the thing(s) the information is about

s/possible/desirable/
because there is a cost to making this distinction, and not all
applications need it.

> c - ensure that wherever possible we can offer descriptions of things 
> which are "on" the web (images, services, gateways and pdfs for example).

Agreed.

> d - ensure that wherever possible the deployment of data is optimized 
> for the machine and network friendly.

Yes.

> e - consider and take in to account the way in which humans, especially 
> those non technically aware, will and do use URIs around the web and in 
> data.

Yes.


-- 
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 Friday, 4 March 2011 20:07:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 4 March 2011 20:07:17 GMT