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

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

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:20:54 -0800
Message-Id: <p0623093bc38dbf424572@[192.168.1.6]>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
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."

Sigh. But there is a weasel in there, if you look. The 'universe' is 
the universe of discourse, ie all the things that can possibly be 
talked about. The conclusion is, that thingie can't be talked about.

However, having given this some more thought, it can, so I was wrong, 
it is a resource. It just can't be referred to with the same URI, is 
all. So I need to find a better way to say this. I'll get back to you 
on that when Ive had another coffee.

Pat

>
>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


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 18:21:13 GMT

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