- From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 11:28:41 -0700
- To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
> > Can you please elaborate on how you believe RDF to be related to > > *accessing* a resource? > > Well, RDF is what you get when you access a resource. And by virtue However, asking a resource to tell you what assertions exist about it is not "semantic web". Consider if Microsoft put up a bulletin board for people to place product reviews, comments, etc. about Microsoft. Do you suppose that http://www.microsoft.com is the first place people would go to find trustworthy information about other people's opinions? When you ask a friend to tell you how the movie was, do you call up Universal studios and as "What did my friend think of the movie?" > e.g. if you click on http://example.org/#cat or http://example.org/#dog > then an intermediary will only know that you clicked on http://example.org, > and therefore not whether you wanted to know more about cats or dogs. The intermediary is only useful for retrieving resource representations anyway. The client would presumably be configured to query trusted metadata sources concurrent with the request to access the resource. In other words, accessing a *resource* and accessing assertion *about* a resource are two different things. HTTP GET to a related endpoint is *not* the way that people will collect assertions *about* an endpoint.
Received on Friday, 26 July 2002 14:29:54 UTC