W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2004

RE: Draft minutes TAG f2f 6 Oct 2004

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:10:47 +0300
Message-ID: <1E4A0AC134884349A21955574A90A7A50ADD12@trebe051.ntc.nokia.com>
To: <chris@w3.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>

Hi folks,

One comments on the minutes of your meeting.

DanC suggests:

Dan: One difference occured to me, if you can get hold of the 
resource itself for commercial purposes can the resource be 
duplicated, or consumed, bu looking at it so therefore a movie, 
donloaded anfd not paid for is an info resource while the table 
is not because looking at the table did not consume it

Firstly: would it be fair to recast this as "an information
resource is any resource that might fall within the scope
of copyright law"? That sounds like a useful criteria for
determining (potential/probable) membership in the class
of "information resources" -- though this could (should)
simply be captured in an RDF schema that folks can use to
classify their resources as they see fit.

Secondly: I don't think the issue has ever been that folks are
particularly confused about what TimBL means by "information resource",
but rather whether the set of web-accessible resources should be
constrained to be equivalent to the set of "information resources"
per TimBLs definition. The above test helps to clarify the 
nature of the membership of "information resources" (per TimBLs
definition) but does not address the question of whether that class 
should be equivalent to the class of web-accessible resources.

2. In the discussion regarding Claud Shannon's work, TimBL 
states that he uses the term "information resource" in the
same way as Claud Shannon, though in the referenced materials
Claud Shannon appears to only use the term "information source" 
(not resource) and I would expect that there is a singificant 
distinction there (such that if the distinction is lost, much
confusion could arise). Every source may be a kind of resource, 
but not every resource may be a kind of source.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
> ext Chris Lilley
> Sent: 06 October, 2004 19:18
> To: www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Draft minutes TAG f2f 6 Oct 2004
> Hello www-tag,
> Minutes attached.
> -- 
>  Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
>  Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
>  Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Thursday, 7 October 2004 11:31:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:43 UTC