- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 22:36:46 -0500
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
On May 11, 2010, at 1:01 PM, Dan Connolly wrote: > On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 15:25 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote: >> Let me give an intuitive case in support of the Nays here. An RDF >> graph is a set, which is not the same as a document, for sure. The >> *same* graph can be encoded in a variety of different syntactic >> forms. > > Meanwhile, the same resource can have a variety of representations. > >> Consider two documents, one in RDF/XML, the other in NTriples, >> describing the same graph. If we identify the document with the graph >> it describes, then these have to be the same. > > But if we say that those documents _represent_ the graph, > they don't have to be the same. Yes, quite. The document is not the graph. No document is ever a graph. > >> But they aren't the >> same. So even if a graph is an information resource (and I agree that >> one can make out a case for that position), it certainly isn't the >> same information resource as any document (In RDF/XML or NTriples or >> any other notation) that represents it syntactically. > > But it can be represented by them. Indeed. But it is distinct from them, is my (only) point. > >> So, one ought to >> use redirection to refer to it, according to http-range-14. > > I don't see that this follows. Well, according to http-range-14, as I understand it, if a bare URI gives a 200-level response to an HTTP GET, then it (the URI) denotes/ refers to the resource that emits that response. And in these RDF- graph-representations, this is always the syntactic entity at the other 'end' of the HTTP response. (Because these things - the syntactic documents which encode the various syntactic representations of RDF graphs - are fully fledged information resources in their own right, so are refer-to-able by URIs, and are therefore indeed so referred to by them, if they respond with a 200-coded response.) So, such URIs cannot refer to the graph itself (because, as we have already agreed, the graph is never identical to a document of any kind, ie to any information resource that can return a 200-coded response.) Pat > >> So, >> whether its an information resource or not is kind of moot, since >> even >> if it is, it can't be directly identified by a URI which returns a >> 200 >> code. >> >> Pat > > > -- > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ > gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E > > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2010 03:38:03 UTC