W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sw-meaning@w3.org > March 2004

RE: Self-descriptive assertions

From: Lynn, James (Software Services) <james.lynn@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 13:07:18 -0500
Message-ID: <5A5CC5E87DE62148845CC96C8868900EBE1F6A@ataexc02.americas.cpqcorp.net>
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>, "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: <public-sw-meaning@w3.org>

Can someone state the "trusted" problem for me? Is it

1. Do I trust the veracity of a graph?

2. Do I trust the identity of the graph's author?

3. Both?

Thanks,
James



> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-sw-meaning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-sw-meaning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Mark Baker
> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 11:36 AM
> To: Sandro Hawke
> Cc: public-sw-meaning@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Self-descriptive assertions
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 01:51:06PM -0500, Sandro Hawke wrote:
> > Does that make sense?  (I'm not saying it very well.)   Turn the
> > "asserted" problem over to the "trusted" problem, because 
> if you can't
> > solve the "trusted" problem (well-enough for your app), 
> you're out of
> > luck anyway.
> 
> Thanks Sandro, yes I think that does make sense, but 
> unfortunately it's
> not a self-descriptive solution.  That is, I can't - in Dan's 
> terms[1] -
> "follow my nose" from an HTTP/RDF message to an understanding 
> of whether
> or not the graph inside that message is asserted.
> 
> I agree that the whole "trust" thing is closely related, but I also
> think that it's orthogonal to assertedness.
> 
>  [1] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Oct/0162.html
> 
> Mark.
> -- 
> Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 23 March 2004 13:11:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:42:16 GMT