W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > October 2004

RE: Revised draft of CBD

From: John Black <JohnBlack@deltek.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:40:52 -0400
Message-ID: <CBEA695878CA104ABC6E74C6B1769275542738@DLTKVMX2.ads.deltek.com>
To: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>, <otto@math.fu-berlin.de>
Cc: <eric@w3.org>, <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

> From: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com [mailto:Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 10:14 AM
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ext John Black [mailto:JohnBlack@deltek.com]
> > Sent: 18 October, 2004 14:50
> > To: Stickler Patrick (Nokia-TP-MSW/Tampere); otto@math.fu-berlin.de
> > Cc: eric@w3.org; pfps@research.bell-labs.com; 
> www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Revised draft of CBD
> > 
> > 
> > > From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
> > > Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 2:13 AM
> > 
> > 
> > > How or where various commonly used forms of description could
> > > be documented and presented as a whole is an open question.
> > > 
> > > I would love to see either the DA WG or the SW BP WG produce
> > > a non-normative advisory document along those lines, but
> > > something less formal, done as a collaboration of interested
> > > parties, would be good too.
> > 
> > I am attempting to build a list of these forms on my Wiki
> > http://kashori.com/wikiPim/BoundedDescriptions
> > I have added pointers to all the recent species mentioned recently
> > but have not yet had time to add all the pages.
> > 
> > The selection criteria is something like this: 
> > 
> > What is the smallest, most valuable, denotative content that 
> > could be returned by WWW processes in response to a URI that is 
> > also used as a vocabulary term in Semantic Web activities.
> 
> It need not be limited to vocabulary terms (unless that is 
> specifically
> your focus) but rather, about any arbitrary resource, for any
> otherwise unrecognized URI.
> 

Hmm. I didn't intend it to be limited in that way. I did mean 
arbitrary resource. I'm trying to say that in the context of  
semantic web statements, URIs are vocabulary terms used to denote 
arbitrary resources. 

So how about this:
What is the minimum, denotative content that can be returned by 
a WWW processes in response to a URI that is also used as a name in 
some semantic web statement to denote an arbitrary resource.

Also, there is a redundancy in the phrase "most valuable, 
denotative". Denotative *is* the value. However "denotative"
is needed or else the minimum could be none. In fact, for the 
same reason, I think it is also needed in the name. How about 
"Bounded Denotative Descriptions"? Except that I have included 
some representations, such as Web Proper Names. Since descriptions 
are a type (textual) of representations, the best may be "Bounded 
Denotative Representations".

John

> Patrick
> 
> 
> > 
> > John Black
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > 
> > > Patrick
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
Received on Monday, 18 October 2004 14:40:53 GMT

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