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

Re: [GRAPH] graph deadlock?

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 23:59:07 +0000
Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <A604262A-B19A-4CED-B189-D3E96AE2C701@garlik.com>
To: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
On 21 Dec 2011, at 08:54, Antoine Zimmermann wrote:

> 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?

Well, if I have a document like:

<http://example.com/foo> a <Thing> .

and then I dereference http://example.com/foo, and get a 200 and a document back, isn't http://example.com/foo both an instance and a document?

Maybe I missed something though.

- Steve

Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2011 23:59:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:02 UTC