W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2007

Re: URIs for web pages (information resources) vs. URIs for concepts

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 07:35:17 -0400
Message-ID: <4667ED75.7070408@openlinksw.com>
To: Max Voelkel <voelkel@fzi.de>
CC: renato@ebi.ac.uk, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Max Voelkel wrote:
> j> I am trying to tease out the distinction between a URI that points to a
> j> resource that "represents" me and a URI that serves as an identifier
> j> ("name") for me.
> Luckily, thats all defined inweb architecture since the http-range-14 debate.
>
> A human-friendly explanation of the W3C-resolution can be found here:
> http://www.dfki.uni-kl.de/~sauermann/2006/11/cooluris/
>
> I believe/hope it answers all these questions ;-)
>   
Max,

So what happens when I have digital representations of Entities/Concepts 
(Things) in Data Spaces that are not directly accessible via HTTP but 
accessible via other TCP/IP based protocols (making them part of the 
Internet)?

Your document inadvertently (your reference to URNs not fitting into 
section 3) implying that HTTP URLs is ultimately the only way which I 
disagree with. I believe that Entities / Concepts in Data Spaces should 
be represented for accessibility  using the URL or URN approaches. After 
all, we are dealing with Distributed Web or Internet based Object IDs 
when we refer to URIs, at the end of the day.

-- 


Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	      Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2007 11:35:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:19 GMT