- From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 13:42:32 -0700
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, public-hydra@w3.org
hello kingsley. On 2014-09-10, 13:30, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 9/10/14 2:07 PM, Erik Wilde wrote: >>> On 9/10/14 1:43 PM, Erik Wilde wrote: >>>> that's assuming that the "property" property (sorry for that) is >>>> defined to be a link (that you have to follow to get type information) >>>> instead of an identifier. >>> When is a hyperlink not an identifier? >> never. but not every identifier is a link. > Every identifier has a describable referent. Thus, every identifier is a > link, but not necessarily a Web medium hyperlink. ok, if we look at it at a very high level of abstraction then yes, every identifier "links" the identifier itself to the identified thing. but that's more in the general sense of "linking" than in the web-level one (links as actionable concepts). > Basically, identifier > resolution (by way of indirection) varies across media. what's interesting is what interaction semantics are associated with an identifier. are applications supposed to follow them (links), or are they supposed to treat them as fixed representations of well-known concepts (identifiers)? two different kinds of interaction semantics that must be made explicit. cheers, dret.
Received on Wednesday, 10 September 2014 20:43:05 UTC