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

RE: What is the URI of Truth?

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 13:41:45 +0300
Message-ID: <6D1A8E7871B9D211B3B00008C7490AA50795876E@treis03nok>
To: champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr, sean@mysterylights.com
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Please see my recent posting of a proposed solution to this
very problem -- i.e. the mapping between namespace qualified
names and semantics.

Cheers,

Patrick

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN [mailto:champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr]
> Sent: 11 June, 2001 12:13
> To: Sean "B." Palmer
> Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: Re: What is the URI of Truth?
> 
> 
> On 08 Jun 2001 17:31:25 +0100, Sean B. Palmer wrote:
> > I don't particularly agree that it is a
> > critical apect of the SW to be able to define non-ambiguous 
> interplay
> > between different namespacing mechanisms,
> 
> I'm not sure I get your point here:
> You seem to distinguish XML-namespaces from RDF-namespaces.
> 
> I do not know what *a* RDF-namespace is : RDF only knows of *one*
> namespace : URIs.
> 
> A problem with XML-namespaces is that are not part of the 
> URI-space, but
> rather of the a space which elements are <uri, xml-name> pairs. Hence
> the mapping-by-concatenation issue.
> This problem is proper to the RDF 1.0 XML syntax, because it needs to
> convert Qnames to URIs. I agree it is not critical to the SW.
> 
> Another problem with XML-namespaces is that, in current 
> practice, their
> is a semantical ambiguity with the URI identifying them (can an http:
> URI identify a namespace ?).
> This problem, IMHO, is critical in many respects, since it raises
> questions about the semantics of URIs. There is no "interplay between
> different namespacing mechanisms" as you wrote: URIs are the global
> namespace of the SW.
> 
>   Pierre-Antoine
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 11 June 2001 06:41:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:49 GMT