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

RE: [Fwd: RE: "information resource"]

From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <len.bullard@intergraph.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 09:10:28 -0500
Message-ID: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE0720682D@hq1.pcmail.ingr.com>
To: "'Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com'" <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, chris@w3.org
Cc: skw@hp.com, www-tag@w3.org

No.  Every time you enter a change, it is a discrete 
change.  There may be an infinite number of discrete 
entries, but they are discrete.  This is the heart 
of the range problem:  cantor sets.   Entropy is 
a problem of addressability.  

What is clear is the architecture is much simpler 
if we accept the web and the semantic web are 
distinct systems.   Shannon and Weaver make it 
clear why that is useful in the opening of their 
work.  Stay away from 'meaningful' exchange until 
you want to layer a semantic system over the 
addressing system.   At the heart of this issue 
is overloading URIs.  It makes the web work but 
it requires two distinct systems to make it work. 
Identification is one system; semantic loading is 
another.

len


From: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com [mailto:Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com]

> The dog is continuous (potentially infinite set of 
> states) and a representation is discrete 
> so even if you can name the dog with a resource name, you can't 
> retrieve all possible states of the dog with it.  You can 
> only name the dog.
> 
> Does HTTP range map to infinities?

This question seems to apply also to information resources. The
dog's veterinary record, which I think we all agree constitutes
an information resource, is also continuous, as it reflects the
medical history of the dog, which varies over time.
Received on Monday, 18 October 2004 14:11:00 UTC

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