W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Drop “g-boxes”, talk about “stateful resources”

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 13:40:10 -0400
Message-ID: <4FBE727A.2070700@openlinksw.com>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 5/24/12 12:45 PM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
>> The RDF usage of "resource" for "anything that can be referred to" does make any usage which restricts it this seriously rather problematic. We have had this problem now for at least 9 years.
> I'd like to see an example that shows this difficulty.
RDF usage of "resource" for "anything that can be referred to" is 
eternally problematic.  The aforementioned utterance doesn't take into 
consideration resource medium variety. As a result, its a major 
HttpRange-14 imbroglio vector.

How about using "resource" in a more qualified way. For instance, a Web 
accessible and addressable resource that's comprised of content 
constrained by the RDF data model is an RDF resource. This kind of 
resource is also explicitly associated with a mime type.

The paragraph above caters for the fact that abstract real-world objects 
described by RDF resources aren't any of the following:

1. resources associated with a mime type
2. resources native to the web medium.

Yes, my embodiment is technically a resource, but not of the medium: 
World Wide Web.



Kingsley Idehen	
Founder&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen

Received on Thursday, 24 May 2012 17:40:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:05 UTC