W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: [URI vs. URIViews] draft-frags-borden-00.txt

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 08:29:26 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301082800.00a2d1c0@joy.songbird.com>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
At 06:23 AM 2/26/02 +0000, Brian McBride wrote:
>>>the syntactic structure of the URI ref. The example that I provide is
>>>supposed to be "nonsensical" _only_ if you presume to interpret what the URI
>>>ref 'means' based on its syntax. I am suggesting that RDF treat URI
>>>references as opaque identifiers, and that it ought not be possible to
>>>derive meaning by parsing the structure of the URI ref.
>>>
>>>To the WG: does RDF mean to say otherwise?
>
>Hmmm, nice one.  RDF operates in the context of the web where there is a 
>function GET (URI, setof mimetypes) to byteseq.  So far we have no formal 
>connection between these, but maybe having one would be helpful.

That might help Euler flush out the use/mention bugs ... ;-)

>>However, that identity test means that RDF needs to be able to discover 
>>coincidence between a uriref used in one document, consisting of a an 
>>absolute URL plus a fragId, and the uriref consisting of that fragId used 
>>in the RDF document which is retrievable by conventional web transfer 
>>protocols using the absolute URL. So to the extent that RDF inference 
>>depends on this ability to cross-identify urirefs in various documents, 
>>the answer is No.
>
>Hmmm, I think of that as a feature of the RDF/XML transfer syntax, not of 
>RDF per se.  What comes out of the parser is absolute uris with option 
>frag id's - that's what's in the graph.  If the model theory is the 
>essence of RDF, it operates on the graph and isn't bothered by this.  The 
>graph contains only absolute URI's with opt frag id's - right?

That's pretty much what I've always assumed.

#g


------------
Graham Klyne
GK@NineByNine.org
Received on Friday, 1 March 2002 05:12:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:30 GMT