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

Re: Proposal: #rdfms-identity-anon-resources

From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:12:06 -0500
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Message-Id: <20010712211210.QYVA20080.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@localhost>
On Thursday, July 12, 2001, at 03:39  PM, pat hayes wrote:

>>> 1. Are anonymous resources allowed in the abstract graph syntax?
>> Not explicitly... I mean, I'm fine with triples stating anonymity,
> ?? That reads like an oxymoron to me. How can one state 
> anonymity without referring to the thing in question, thereby 
> rendering it not anonymous?

OK, perhaps not anonymity then... more something along the lines 
of the various properties people are interested in assigning to 
anonymous nodes.

>>> No specific mechanism for generating such URIs is mandated, 
>>> but the following options might be considered:
>>
>> This is the problem I have. I think all parsers should spit 
>> out equivalent genids for the same document -- the spec should 
>> mandate the genid to use.
>
> Than it's not a genid. The global uniqueness of the token (not 
> type) is part of what makes the genid idea work, seems to me. 
> If my parser has to use the same id as your parser, then why 
> not just include that id in the syntax?

Well, I wish they would have, but people are lazy sometimes and 
they don't like typing in lots of genids. So I see the syntax as 
an abbreviation more than anything else.

--
       "Aaron Swartz"      |           Blogspace
  <mailto:me@aaronsw.com>  |  <http://blogspace.com/about/>
<http://www.aaronsw.com/> |     weaving the two-way web
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2001 17:12:31 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:38:09 EDT