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

Resource identity of GETable URIs [Was Re: the mistake I made! ]

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 15:13:36 -0500
To: nathan@webr3.org
Cc: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1299269616.2525.31941.camel@dbooth-laptop>
On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 13:41 +0000, Nathan wrote:
[ . . . ]
> It's vital to anybody that wants to use layer 3, to have this 
> distinction Tim promotes, the guys on layer 2 stuff, like Roy and Hixie 
> don't hit that need, the guys on layer 3 like us and Tim, do hit it.

I disagree.  I think Tim's view *attempts* to ensure that things are
named unambiguously, or perhaps "encourages people to *try* to name
things unambiguously", but as Pat Hayes has pointed out on several
occasions, 
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin/homepage/publications/indefenseofambiguity.html 
I think it is inherently *impossible* to ensure that things are named
unambiguously for all applications.  It is always possible to make ever
finer distinctions, so a URI whose resource identity is unambiguous to
one application may well be ambiguous to another application that
requires finer distinctions.  

Bottom line: While many applications may require that "GETtable URIs
refer to information resources and not cars", others do not, and the
success of the semantic web does *not* depend on making that particular
distinction.  Nonetheless, I *do* think it is useful to be able to talk
about which URIs make this distinction and which do not, i.e., which
resources can be considered disjoint from the class of IRs.

[ . . . ]
> There are three layers of the web,
> 1: a web of machines
> 2: a web processes which we transfer data to/from and ask to do things
> 3: a web of things talked about or referenced in information, which 
> includes things on layer 1, layer 2, and everything else one can conceive.


-- 
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 20:14:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 4 March 2011 20:14:05 GMT