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

RE: web proper names

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 12:29:37 +0300
Message-ID: <1E4A0AC134884349A21955574A90A7A50A1D0E@trebe051.ntc.nokia.com>
To: <zednenem@psualum.com>, <daniel.oconnor@gmail.com>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of ext 
> David Menendez
> Sent: 21 September, 2004 03:13
> To: Daniel O'Connor
> Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: Re: web proper names
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel O'Connor writes:
> 
> > 
> > Mmm, I stumbled across this in my internet travels today:
> > 
> > http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/HTTP-URI.html
> > 
> > And thought it was of some relevance.
> 
> It's funny. I agree with most of TBL's premises, but I reach the
> opposite conclusion: I side with Roy Fielding and the "URIs 
> can identify
> anything" camp.
> 
> I think the problem with Tim's argument is that he assumes "URIs can
> identify abstract things (not web pages)" is the same as "all URIs
> identify abstract things (not web pages)". As I see it, some URIs
> identify web pages and other identify abstract, non-web-page things.
> 
> The key point, for me, is that web pages are *themselves* abstract
> things. Every time you dereference <http://www.cnn.com/>, for example,
> you will get a different HTML document, but they all 
> represent the same
> thing.
> 
> You can ask, "Does <http://www.cnn.com/> identify 'CNN' or 'the front
> page of CNN'?" The truth is we don't know. CNN controls the 
> URI, and so
> far as I know they haven't come down on one side or another. That just
> means that we shouldn't use <http://www.cnn.com/> in our RDF data,
> because we don't know what it means.

+1! 

In my ideal world, one could ask

MGET / HTTP/1.1
Host: www.cnn.com

and get back an RDF description that would tell us what
<http://www.cnn.com> actually means...

;-)


> 
> On the other hand, if we want to talk about a particular HTML document
> we obtained by dereferencing <http://www.cnn.com/>, then we 
> need to say
> something like this:
> 
>     [ a ex:HTMLDocument ] ex:obtainedFrom "http://www.cnn.com/".
>
> 
> The fun part[1] is that the document is itself a resource and could be
> given its own URI (perhaps 
> <http://example.com/pagesIveDownloaded/12345>
> or <cid:123456@example.com>).

Exactly.

Patrick
Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2004 09:30:19 GMT

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