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

Re: Model-specific identity for anon resources, and its representation: A new issue?

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 20:13:36 -0400 (EDT)
To: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
cc: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>, <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>, <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0106152008150.22315-100000@tux.w3.org>

On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, Aaron Swartz wrote:

> On Friday, June 15, 2001, at 06:10  PM, Sergey Melnik wrote:
>
> > I don't agree that anonymous nodes should be part of the abstract
> > syntax, and would suggest to consider this issue when cleaning up the
> > model.

I disagree: it is critically important to distinguish between well known,
public URI names for things and ad-hoc generated placeholder IDs that have
been dreamt up by an RDF/XML parser. Unless the abstract syntax (or
whatever we call it) maintains that distinction, we risk getting into a
terrible muddle.

> I tend to agree with this position. However, I would take it one
> step further -- I believe that these "uniquely generated
> resources" should have consistent, repeatably generated URIs.
> That is, all parsers should assign the same genid to the same
> resource.

do you really mean this last claim?
I suspect you meant that all parsers should assign a predictable genid
given a common RDF/XML description mentioning a resource. 'all parsers
should assign the same genid to the same resource' would be magic, since
many times parsers won't have that information accessible.


Dan
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 20:13:41 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:37:10 EDT