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

Re: Meaning of URIRefs

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 08:57:13 -0700
Message-ID: <3DBABB59.5000502@robustai.net>
To: Bob MacGregor <macgregor@ISI.EDU>
CC: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Bob MacGregor wrote:

> If I understand Sandro's position correctly, then if I use a URI
> foo:bar (when oh when are we going to finally add qnames to RDF?),
> I'm committed to "believing" all of the information
> stored in the corresponding document.  

If I understand Sandro's concern correctly, I doubt we will be able to 
get there from here.  The very nature of a semantic web is that 
everything is connected, everything relies on the rest of the network to 
establish it's meaning.   The problem is complicated further because RDF 
theory does not seem to recognize any boundaries.   But there may be a 
solution:  Why not say that when one graph points to a node in another 
graph it commits only to the *identity* of the node?  This would work 
like that famous scene in When Harry Met Sally where the lady at the 
restaurant said "I'll have what she is having".  

Seth Russell
http://radio.weblogs.com/0113759/
  
Received on Saturday, 26 October 2002 11:57:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:56 GMT