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

Re: A use case for anon nodes - action from telecon

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:25:36 -0700
Message-Id: <v04210103b7861dd95114@[]>
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
Cc: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>At 11:40 PM 7/23/01 -0700, pat hayes wrote:
>>>On Monday, July 23, 2001, at 09:26  PM, pat hayes wrote:
>>>>It amounts to a global unique-name assumption, which is obviously 
>>>>not correct on the Web, since it isnt even correct on many web 
>>>>pages. It may be correct (in an ideal world) for URL's, but it 
>>>>cannot be assumed for all URIs
>>>Do you mean URNs, not URLs?
>>No, I meant URL's, which I take to mean a URI that locates 
>>something. I'm not sure about URN's: I don't see any global 
>>unique-name assumption (ie the assumption that everything has a 
>>unique name, so different names must denote distinct things) in the 
>>URN specs anywhere, but maybe I just havnt found it.
>I think that's one of the great unresolved issues of URIs in 
>general.  I think either way is sustainable and results in the same 
>models, but different folks seem to think differently.

Maybe. I think a global unique-name model is sustainable only in a 
very fragile sense: if everyone cooperates and nobody ever makes a 
mistake or gets confused, then it will work. But one error, anywhere, 
could make the entire edifice crumble, since nobody could then rely 
on the global assumption being valid.  In fact, I will undertake to 
be the fly in the ointment, and will offer a universal 
unique-name-wrecking service by generating copies of RDF webpages 
with just the names changed.


(650)859 6569 w
(650)494 3973 h (until September)
Received on Thursday, 26 July 2001 15:25:27 UTC

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