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

Re: web proper names

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 12:05:34 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040921120104.02bcf748@127.0.0.1>
To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

At 16:57 20/09/04 -0400, Thomas B. Passin wrote:
>Harry Halpin wrote:
>>Still, Web Proper Names are meant to solve the problem in a RDF-neutral 
>>matter, and can solve via either a new URI
>>scheme or using a new format (RDDL-based) for representing things qua
>>things. Enjoying the discussion...
>
>Adopting the three predicates I suggested (with better names, I hope!) 
>would require just one (set of) change to rdf.  Adopting Web Proper Names 
>would require two -
>
>1) Accept that these new kind of names have special significance
>2) State what the correct semantics are within rdf for them.
>
>One change is is better than two, I would think.  So far as being 
>rdf-neutral is concerned, once adopted by rdf, the new predicates would 
>have standard URIs.  These URIs could be used by rdf, by topic maps (as 
>Published Subject Identifiers), by RDDL (which uses URIs in the sense of 
>identifiers too), etc.

I don't think there is an "easy" solution here, because either way it is 
necessary to agree about what existing URIs are understood to denote (in 
the RDF semantics sense): "expressions" or "denotations" (in the 
Halpin/Thompson sense)?  The problem is, I think, that there's a growing 
body of practice using either of these.

#g


------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2004 11:39:19 GMT

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