W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2002

Re: resource equivalence was: Re: fragment identifiers

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 11:49:34 -0400
Message-ID: <058e01c23329$b7181640$0a2e249b@nemc.org>
To: "Michael Mealling" <michael@neonym.net>
Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>

Michael Mealling wrote:

>
> Sure. But we have to be very careful to state that equivalence other
> than syntactic URI equivalence is system dependent. You're statements
> implicetly made the suggestion that they were universal and they aren't.

Fair enough, perhaps we could say "semantic equivalence".

...
>
> But please be careful to qualify you're statements of 'equivalence' so
that
> it is clear that it is only _your_ definition that you are using. There
> is no uniform or universal concept of equivalence for URIs and Resources
> other than what RFC 2396 specifies.
>

Yes well with all due respect to RFC 2396, it seems to raise as many
questions as it answers -- as evidenced by these discussions. My intention
at the time I wrote http://www.openhealth.org/RDDL/SchemaAlgebra was to
_start_ to write down some of these definitions in as precise a fashion as
possible, but frankly I've not edited it in awhile. I also don't mean to
dictate (as if I alone _could_) that these actually be the definitions
written in stone, rather to propose some precise definitions that can be
discussed if others agree. In any case RF has said much the same as I had
proposed and I suspect that he arrived at his impressions entirely
independently of my referenced document -- I haven't scoured the details of
his thesis to see if similar equations are contained within -- but this does
suggest that we might have something concrete to discuss as part of a Web
Architecture document.

Jonathan
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2002 11:55:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:10 GMT