W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > April 2002

RE: Disambiguation; keeping the "U" in "URI"

From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:45:27 +0100
To: "'Joshua Allen'" <joshuaa@microsoft.com>, "'Nick Matsakis'" <matsakis@mit.edu>, "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <003201c1ec5f$75df9600$887ba8c0@mitchum>
Hash: SHA1

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua Allen [mailto:joshuaa@microsoft.com] 
> >   2. Don't trust URIs to refer to distinct entities
> All this is suggesting is that we stop using URIs to identify 
> things.  So I guess we should come up with a different scheme 
> for coming up with identifiers for things.  Maybe we will 
> call it Universal Thing Identifiers, or UTI.

That doesn't follow. You're going to have this problem with any
naming scheme.

> I think it is not so much RDF that suffers, since it also 
> eliminates usefulness of N3, bare naked triples, or any other 
> semantic information.  Essentially #2 defeats the purpose of
> *URIs*.  

Not at all. You just can't make the assumption in an open system
that a URI is always being used to refer to the same resource
across the system. Ambiguity is going to be a part of a system
where anyone can say anything about anything. URIs are very useful,
but care needs to be taken when merging data where URIs are used as

No, we can't stop people from asserting that a web page is a car,
but that doesn't mean that we have to jump through hoops to
accommodate those people or worry about having to interop with them

Yes, let's impose order on those people...or maybe they'll impose
order on us. Anyway you do realize that eventually cars will have
IP addresses and very possibly URIs?

Bill de hÓra

Version: PGP 7.0.4

Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 09:52:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:40 UTC