W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2007

Re: [httpRange-14] What is an Information Resource?

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:54:01 +0000
Message-ID: <4767A6C9.1000506@danbri.org>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: www-tag@w3.org

Pat Hayes wrote:
>> Pat Hayes wrote:
>>
>>>> Can we please have some clarification here?
>>>
>>> Im as confused as you are. It seems to me that the whole story about 
>>> 'information resources' is muddled. I don't know what an "essential 
>>> characteristic" is. I was just responding to the ideas as best I can.
>>>
>>> I would prefer to simply say that some HTTP endpoints are considered 
>>> to be resources, while others are not.
>>
>> I guess you mean "information resources" here; all things are 
>> resources, still (in RDF/OWL speak)?
> 
> No, I really did mean resources. If my URI is intended to denote, say, 
> Jupiter, then Jupiter is a resource (though that terminology should 
> change, IMO). But the thingie that catches my URI and redirects it to 
> something else, emitting a 303 as it does so: THAT thing is not a 
> resource at all, not even an information resource. Or at any rate, if it 
> is one, then you can only refer to it with a different URI, because my 
> URI denotes Jupiter.

A different thingie, sure. But if it exists in the world (as networking 
thingies do) but isn't a "resource", then you've stopped using 
"Resource" in the inclusive sense given by
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#gloss

"Resource (n.)(as used in RDF)(i) An entity; anything in the universe. 
(ii) As a class name: the class of everything; the most inclusive 
category possible."

I agree that it's an unfortunate word to use; I prefer "thing". Too late 
for existing specs, but I see no reason to prolong the agony. 
"Information Thing" is no worse than "Information Resource"...

Dan
Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 10:54:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:51 GMT