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

RE: URI Comparisons: RFC 2616 vs. RDF

From: Nuno Bettencourt <nuno.bett@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:44:53 -0000
To: <nathan@webr3.org>
Cc: "'Dave Reynolds'" <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>, "'Martin Hepp'" <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-ID: <008301cbb66e$40d68710$c2839530$@gmail.com>
Hi,

The doubt just kept on because in all protocols we were still referring to the same URN.

Thank you for your explanation, and we've been using the owl:sameAs property for this. 

Nuno Bettencourt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nathan [mailto:nathan@webr3.org]
> Sent: segunda-feira, 17 de Janeiro de 2011 17:34
> To: Nuno Bettencourt
> Cc: 'Dave Reynolds'; 'Martin Hepp'; public-lod@w3.org
> Subject: Re: URI Comparisons: RFC 2616 vs. RDF
> 
> Nuno Bettencourt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Even though I'll be deviating the point just a bit, since we're discussing URI
> comparison in terms of RDF, I would like to request some help.
> >
> > I have a doubt about URLs when it comes to RDF URI comparison. Is
> > there any RFC that establishes if
> >
> > http://abc.com:80/~smith/home.html
> > https://abc.com:80/~smith/home.html
> > or even
> > ftp://abc.com:80/~smith/home.html
> >
> > should or not be considered the same resource?
> 
> No, and no such rules can be written (as they are case specific, and all the
> above URIs could easily, and often do, point to differing resources)
> - if all URIs point to the same resource then it should be stated as such by
> some other means, which in RDF would mean owl:sameas.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Nathan
Received on Monday, 17 January 2011 17:54:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:31 UTC