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

Re: #rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about

From: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 11:09:30 -0700
Message-ID: <3B28FDDA.6081504E@db.stanford.edu>
To: guha@alpiri.com
CC: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
"R.V.Guha" wrote:
> 
> This whole distinction between ID and about is trouble
> waiting to happen.
> 
> RDF may be embedded in messages (like SOAP) that might not have
> a url of any sort. In this case, the distinction between id and about,
> and
> the proposal to use "#" which is based on the idea of anchors all lead
> to nothing but trouble.
> 
> guha

I agree with Guha. As to me, I'd get rid of rdf:ID altogether, or make
it deprecated.

With respect to this and other syntax issues, I'd like to remind of the
"roundtrip" test, which have been raised many times on RDF Interest: an
RDF tool must be able to parse, serialize, parse, serialize etc. without
loss of information, i.e., on every parse, exactly the same set of
statements is produced. Notice that after the first parse, rdf:ID will
be necessarity replaced by rdf:about, since the model does not
intrinsically capture the information about its origin.

Sergey


> 
> Brian McBride wrote:
> 
> > With reference to action:
> >
> >   AP: 2001-06-08#4: Brian McBride to write up this third proposed
> >        interpretation
> >
> > A third proposal is to regard:
> >
> >   <rdf:Description rdf:ID="foo"/>
> >
> > as equivalent to:
> >
> >   <rdf:Description rdf:about="#foo"/>
> >
> > Brian
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2001 13:43:51 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:37:08 EDT