W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > February 2002

Re: URIs vs. URIviews (Pat's questions)

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 11:50:40 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020219114603.041433b0@joy.songbird.com>
To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
Cc: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 10:48 PM 2/18/02 -0600, Aaron Swartz wrote:
>This seems to me like just continuing RDF's charade of living in its own
>little world. I thought the idea was to have RDF describe the Resources in
>the rest of the Web, not to create it's own sense of Web Resources and
>describe that. If we're going to create our own little world, why not go the
>whole way?

The way I have come to live with this, for the time being, is that RDF 
resources are a superset of Web resources;  i.e. RDF resources are the same 
as Web resources when labelled with a URI-without-fragment, but when RDF 
uses a URI-with-fragment-identifier it is referring to something that 
doesn't (necessarily) have a direct Web-resource counterpart.

I don't claim this is Right or Good.  Just a personal strategy for 
coping.  (There's no need to throw out everything just because one part 
doesn't fit.)

#g



------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research              <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2002 06:56:19 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:16 EDT