W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2001

Re: #rdfms-literals-as-resources in scope?

From: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 14:26:07 -0700
Message-ID: <3B4CC46F.9FA36B7A@db.stanford.edu>
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
CC: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, bdehora@interx.com, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Graham Klyne wrote:
> At 02:52 PM 7/10/01 -0700, Sergey Melnik wrote:
> >resource (constant) = URI, name, referring expression
> I think that's clearly at odds with RFC2396 (which seems the nearest thing
> we have to a universally accepted starting point for defining these things):
> [RFC 2396, section 1.1]:
>        Resource
>           A resource can be anything that has identity.  Familiar
>           examples include an electronic document, an image, a service
>           (e.g., "today's weather report for Los Angeles"), and a
>           collection of other resources.  Not all resources are network
>           "retrievable"; e.g., human beings, corporations, and bound
>           books in a library can also be considered resources.

Hm. From reading M&S it feels though that Resources are
URI-identifiable/-ied things. I think this is *the* top-priority issue
that we have to clarify and hold on (e-)paper.

Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2001 17:00:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:50 UTC