W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > December 2011

Re: [GRAPH] graph deadlock?

From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 09:54:46 +0100
Message-ID: <4EF19ED6.4090903@emse.fr>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Le 20/12/2011 21:55, Steve Harris a écrit :
> [skip]
>
> I think most(?) people agree that a URI should denote/name/something
> a graph, or some other entity, but not both at the same time. The
> problem is that people don't follow this rule in RDF now*, don't
> follow it in quads as implemented now, and I don't think they will
> follow it in the future.
>
> So, does that break RDF, or does it break their applications?
>
> If it just breaks people's applications, then we can write what we
> would like to happen in the document, and people who do the Right
> Thing™ will be fine, and people who don't will suffer in some way.
>
> If on the other hand it breaks RDF, it's probably already too late,
> and we have a problem.
>
> - Steve
>
> * e.g. http://blog.iandavis.com/2010/11/04/is-303-really-necessary/

I haven't read the whole post but where do you see a URI which is used 
to denote two different things at the same time? How do you know it 
denotes 2 things simultaneously?

>
[snap]
-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol
École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne
158 cours Fauriel
42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
France
Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 83 36
Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2011 08:54:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:46 GMT