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.

Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 20:13:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:49 UTC