W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: RDF resources and Web resources

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 09:03:34 +0000
Message-ID: <3AAB3F66.82BAFAB@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
CC: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>, RDF Comments <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
I have added a reference to:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Jan/0006.html

in

http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-fragments

Under a further discussion heading as this issue is intimately related
to one already in the issues list.

Brian


Graham Klyne wrote:
> 
> At 12:36 PM 3/9/01 -0600, Aaron Swartz wrote:
> >Graham Klyne, in his terminology note drew a distinction between RDF and Web
> >resources, which DanBri felt was a mistake:
> >
> >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Jan/0104.html
> >
> ><q>
> >"Web Resource" versus "RDF Resource" is not a distinction I care to make. We
> >identify resources "to", "for" and "in" the Web, not "on" it: URIs have long
> >allowed us to name so-called non-Web resources. For example: telephone
> >numbers, Java interfaces, intellectual works / publications (ISBN, Handle
> >etc), and the like can all be identified as RDF=Web resources, despite not
> >being "on" the Web.
> >
> >By this I don't mean to claim that all W3C/IETF/etc documents that appeal to
> >a notion of 'Resource' relating to URIs are consistent. Just that they
> >should be, and that we shouldn't take as a goal the articulation of a
> >distinction between 'Web' versus 'RDF' resources.
> ></q>
> >
> >He also provided a list of related links to check for more information on
> >the problem.
> >
> >More recently, at the W3C Technical Plenary, Graham raised the issue that
> >there was no official mapping between URIs and resources. I don't have a
> >pointer. Graham, have you raised this on the lists?
> 
> Not recently.  I believe I raised this on the XML namespace/URI discussion
> some time ago, and periodically buttonhole individuals.
> 
> I did raise this on URI-IG in a message dated 25-Jan.
> 
> The matter was raised again in the RDF-IG F2F at the technical plenary, at
> which time the response (if I understood correctly) was that Web resources
> and RDF resources are not the same set of values.
> 
> #g
> 
> ------------
> Graham Klyne
> GK@NineByNine.org
Received on Sunday, 11 March 2001 04:02:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:27 GMT