W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > August 2001

Re: Comments on Jena Paper

From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:37:16 -0700
Message-Id: <200108020501.f7251I613871@theinfo.org>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: RDF-Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
On Monday, July 30, 2001, at 05:50  PM, Brian McBride wrote:

>> In http://www-uk.hpl.hp.com/people/bwm/papers/20001221-paper/ 
>> you wrote:
>>
>>> Each such URI defines a new resource.  Thus there may be many
>>> resources which represent the same tree.
>>
>> Do you have evidence to support this claim? I have heard it as
>> an opinion several times but I was curious whether this was
>> clarified in any document.
>
> What exactly is the claim you think that is being made.  I think the
> claim the paper is making is that the interpretation of M&S on which I
> based my implementation had resources 'identified' rather than 'named'
> by a URI.

Sorry, perhaps my wording was a bit confusing. What I meant was:

Are there documents that led you to this view on the nature of 
URIs and Resources?
Also, how exactly does this view affect Jena?

Apologies if the second question is answered by your paper. I am 
currently without an Internet connection and seem to have 
deleted my copy of the paper.

--
       "Aaron Swartz"      |           Blogspace
  <mailto:me@aaronsw.com>  |  <http://blogspace.com/about/>
<http://www.aaronsw.com/> |     weaving the two-way web
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2001 00:59:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:51 GMT