W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > December 2003

Re: Trust, Context, Justification and Quintuples

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 20:16:50 -0500
Message-Id: <200312190116.hBJ1GoIX014824@roke.hawke.org>
To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org


> > ... Of course any RDF/XML file on the web gives you a URI for the
> > conjunction of zero or more RDF triples.   That's not far from what
> > folks often want, even if the granularity doesn't always match
> > people's expectations.
> > 
> 
> This would work by convention instead of by spec...

How else would you read RFC 2396 (especially bis), RFC 2616, and
WebArch, if not to say that the RDF triples serialized and transmitted
in a "200 OK" response to an HTTP GET of some URI were the resource
(or the current state of the resource) identified by the URI?

That is: if you get a "200 OK" with Content-Type: application/rdf+xml,
you know the URI (according to its host) identifies a knowledge base,
a time-varying collection of RDF triples, the current contents of
which are exactly what was transmitted to you.  That's the only
sensible reading I've been able to make of the relevant specs, so I
think that means I'm operating according to spec.  I'd agree the specs
aren't terribly clear on the subject, though.

Well, there's slight variation of "information source" for "knowledge
base", but the effect of the same.  In any case, it works for
attribution, explanations, and trust reasoning.   RDF triple T is
believed because source/kb R with URI U provided it in response to a
GET of U.

        -- sandro
Received on Thursday, 18 December 2003 20:16:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:03 GMT