W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2012

Re: issue-57 background reading for F2F (short required reading)

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:42:48 -0400
Message-ID: <506C9538.3030603@openlinksw.com>
To: www-tag@w3.org
On 10/3/12 2:54 PM, David Booth wrote:
> 1. Ambiguity is a fact of life.  In spite of the AWWW's
> statement that "By design, a URI identifies one resource",
> http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#id-resources  ambiguity of
> reference is inescapable.  This is well established in
> philosophy, and basically boils down to the fact that when
> descriptions are used to define things, it is always possible
> to make finer distinctions than a description anticipated.
Are we still using "identifies" when denotes appears to be much clearer 
re. this particular matter?

A URI can denote anything.
An HTTP URI can denote anything.
An HTTP URL specifically denotes a Web document.
A Resource is the Content associated with a Web document.
A Document is comprised of Content.

Linked Data demonstrates how you can use *indirection*  to denote 
*anything* using an HTTP URI. In this usage context said URI resolves to 
associated content at a Web address/location (URL). Note, *indirection* 
may be explicit (303 redirection) or implicit (via use of a fragment id 
or hash).

Links:

1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2012-07/msg00190.html -- 
a related discussion on the ontolog forum that actually reached amicable 
conclusion re. this matter.

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen







Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2012 19:43:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 3 October 2012 19:43:10 GMT