Re: Thought experiments on a proposed solution

From: "John Black" <JohnBlack@deltek.com>
Subject: RE: Thought experiments on a proposed solution
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:54:20 -0400

[...]

> - Anyone can use a URI, but only one agent *owns* it.  The 
> social meaning of a URI includes this idea "...that the 
> URI ownership system makes statements by owners 
> authoritative weight"
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jul/0022.html

What does this phrase mean?  If it means that there is a collection of
information about the URI that all users of the URI must believe in, then
it is a recipe for ossification of the Semantic Web as it will prevent
disagreement and dissent.  If all that it means that when I say potato and
you say potato that we agree that these are the same name, then it is a
requirement for any sort of communication.

> I'm suggesting a protocol that supports this notion.  It lets 
> an owner emphasize his intention.

Sure, by all means let the ``owner'' have some way of providing what it
means by a URI.  Sure, by all means provide some way of easily finding this
information.  Sure, by all means say users of the URI might find it useful
to utilize this information.  Sure, by all means say that systems that
don't commit to this ``authoritative'' information might be doing
themselves a disfavour.  Sure, but all means say that systems that do
commit to this information might decide not to talk to systems that don't.
However, do not, at the peril of stultifying the growth of the semantic
web, require that *all* users of the URI have to believe in this
information.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider

Received on Friday, 3 October 2003 14:08:04 UTC