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

RE: web proper names

From: Jon Hanna <jon@hackcraft.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 21:27:26 +0100
To: "'Thomas B. Passin'" <tpassin@comcast.net>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <008a01c49f50$41a0bdf0$0201a8c0@Lugh>

> Confusion does tend to creep in (as rdf stands now) when 
> http: schemes 
> are used in URIs used as identifiers.  Some people think that 
> because an 
> http: scheme is specific about how it is to be dereferenced, 
> that when 
> used as an rdf identifier it must be referring to the dereferenced 
> representation.  But rdf actually says no such thing.

Certainly RDF says no such thing, arguably HTTP says no such thing
either.

> IMHO, we just need a few predicates, and not another uri scheme.

Hopefully this is the last time I'll mention this, because I'm aware of
quite a few flaws in it, but I made a stab at this idea at
http://www.hackcraft.net/rep/rep.xml (go to
http://www.hackcraft.net/rep/rep.html if your browser doesn't do XSLT).

It's recently occurred to me that this can be made to do useful things
with the "conceptual document" side of the HTTP-Range debate, and since
the debate is the main reason I've put off doing anything more solid,
and since I now think I can route around that, I'll hopefully find time
to do so soon.

> Of course, I haven't yet read the "Web Proper Names: Naming 
> Referents on 
> the Web" paper

Please do. Either you'll agree with me and add another voice to my view
of it, or you'll disagree with me and hopefully help me see the error of
my ways (the authors of the paper have tried, but neither of us have
budged much so far).
Received on Monday, 20 September 2004 20:27:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:09 GMT