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

Re: does RDF require understanding all 82 URI schemes?

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 02:09:35 -0000
Message-ID: <011401c09562$1cae6a20$8ada93c3@z5n9x1>
To: (wrong string) Řerst" <duerst@w3.org>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> > > <#x>
> > >   daml:equivalentTo
> > >   http://www.megginson.com/battles.rdf#jutland
>
> I already answered this one privately -- this solution won't scale,
> because it requires you to retrieve a resource to find the aliased
> identifier [...] it's not a practical alternative to sharing the same
> identifier.

Well, actually that depends on what you are doing. If the Schema above is
directly adjacent to your SW system, and your system only groks the
"Megginson-ised" URI, then it can convert from one to t'other. Therefore,
it is a practical alternative in some closed (and semi-closed) world RDF
systems. It wouldn't scale on the WWW, because as you say, there could be
thousands of links by the time you get to the third level... Seth Russell
wrote something a while ago about the Semantic Web being fractal in origin
that you might want to research (or if you are lucky he might pipe up on).

Trust is also an issue here, because it is of more significance the smaller
the system you are working on. When you scale a system up too large, it
becomes fuzzy. This does not prevent your processor from groking local
stuff successfully.

BTW: Hey Martin, I put the umlaut in your name in my mail program :-)

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
[ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Monday, 12 February 2001 21:13:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:48 GMT