Summary of responses to anonymous resource proposal at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jul/0082.html.


Aaron:  [11-Jul-2001 12:47:33-0500]
(a) Is OK that triples can contain anonymous entries, but not with a new anonymous resource type.
(b) thinks genID algorithm should be specified.


Sergey:  [11-Jul-2001 14:26:07-0800]
Agrees with Aaron about genID algorithm.


Jos:  [12-Jul-2001 12:17:24+0100]
Thinks that anaonymous resources have NO name;  cites empty circles.


Ron:  [11-Jul-2001 20:33:47-0700]
Agrees with Aaron about (a), but "predefined" genIDs would be nice, not essential:

"""
I'd be happy with a non-normative convention suggesting how
the IDs should be generated. I don't want it to be a MUST
in the clarified spec.
"""


DanC: [12-Jul-2001 02:02:51-0500]
Strongly feels anonymous resources must be represented in the model.


Jan: [12-Jul-2001 10:36:54+0100]
Anon resources are needed in the model.


Jos: [12-Jul-2001 12:28:51+0100]
Agrees with DanC.


DanBri: [12-Jul-2001 07:29:33-0400]
Warning about possible problems of generating same URI for same text in different context.  Gives an example with a relative URI.


StefanK: [non-WG comment, posted to RDF-IG, 12-Jul-2001 09:38:28+0200]
Thinks that forcing a system to invent names will cause problems.

"""
1. An important application of RDF is the join of RDF graphs:
By now named resources (with identical URI) are glued together,
but anonymous are not. Please don't change this.
"""

and

"""
2.1 I don't think there exists an algorithm that fulfills
the requirement of your 'essential property of a unique URI'
you mentioned above.
"""


Jan: [12 Jul 2001 14:19:28 +0100]
Cites an earlier analysis, claiming it shows why having anonymous resources are needed in the model.  http://ioctl.org/rdf/discuss/anonymous#Complications