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

RE: What to do about namespace derived URI refs... (long)

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 13:23:28 +0300
Message-ID: <6D1A8E7871B9D211B3B00008C7490AA507958742@treis03nok>
To: decoy@iki.fi, tshipley@symbio-tech.com
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Sampo Syreeni [mailto:decoy@iki.fi]
> Sent: 07 June, 2001 12:59
> To: Trent Shipley
> Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: RE: What to do about namespace derived URI refs... (long)
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Trent Shipley wrote:
> >> 2) You cannot wish away (by virture of some definiton 
> which is out of
> >> channel) the fact that 
> http://robustai.net/~seth/index.htm#Truth returns
> >> some sting of bits and that the URL identifies that string 
> of bits.  It
> >> cannot do that and identify my Truth as the same time, 
> without causing an
> >> ambiguity.
> >
> >Um, isn't the return of anything or any behavior relative to a UR* a
> >property of the "user agent" or application.
> Consider what happens when you want to describe both a) that 
> Seth's Truth is
> equivalent to the Truth in some other ontology b) that the paragraph
> identified as http://robustai.net/~seth/index.htm#Truth is 
> not suitable for
> young eyes. Both are valid, common applications of RDF. You 
> do not seriously
> suggest that we use the same URI reference, describing Seth's 
> raunchy exposť
> as the Truth and the Truth as something young people 
> shouldn't be allowed to
> see?
> The concept and the text *need* to have separate identities, just as a
> namespace and the schema defining some elements in that 
> namespace need to be
> different (one isA namespace, the other e.g. an XML document, 
> with quite
> different properties and connections).
> Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:decoy@iki.fi, gsm: +358-50-5756111
> student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front

Well said Sampo.

I think that (unfortunately, and surprisingly) alot of folks forget that
URIs can point to "anything", not just web resources. Too many folks
that I talk to think URI=URL=some data on the web, and that's why we
have the mess we have with HTTP URLs used to identify *abstract* namespaces
and the abiguity between statements about abstract concepts or schema
definitions for serializations about abstract concepts and universal
identifiers for abstract concepts.

I also think that the solution is much easier than alot of folks think, in
that we simply need to use URNs for abstract concepts (including namespaces)
and simply make statements about those abstract concepts as to how they
might be described or defined in various concrete web resources (such as
where an XML Schema might be for a given namespace, etc.).

Once we accept that an abstract concept, such as a metadata property
defined by some ontology, can and should have identity irrespective of
a given serialization, then we can use a combination of URN and URL ref
to define the necessary mappings from serialized form to unified
representation required for true syndication and use of knowledge on
the semantic web.



Patrick Stickler                      Phone:  +358 3 356 0209
Senior Research Scientist             Mobile: +358 50 483 9453
Software Technology Laboratory        Fax:    +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center                 Video:  +358 3 356 0209 / 4227
Visiokatu 1, 33720 Tampere, Finland   Email:  patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2001 06:23:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:36 UTC