- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 10:24:57 -0400
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Cc: www-talk@w3.org
On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 02:41:17PM +0100, Sean B. Palmer wrote: > Practically, rdf:ID would be a total disaster if chunks of documents were > the only things that could be referenced by fragment identifers. In the context of RDF, of course any string can be interpreted to be identifying anything, and everybody can get along. It's in the larger context of the Web that this private agreement breaks down, where we have oodles of deployed code that understands that URIs identify resources, not URI references (i.e. web servers don't get the fragment id). I don't think there's much more to say in this discussion, is there? Let me just mention this RESTwiki page which includes some pointers to some good Aaron/DanC/RoyF discussions, plus Aaron's summary (which I know you know about Sean 8-); http://conveyor.com/RESTwiki/moin.cgi/OnlyMakeStatementsAboutUris MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Thursday, 23 May 2002 10:16:26 UTC