W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > October 2012

Re: ldp-ISSUE-15 (sharing binary resources and metadata): sharing binary resources and metadata [Linked Data Platform core]

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2012 07:37:04 -0400
Message-ID: <506EC660.1040705@openlinksw.com>
To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
On 10/4/12 7:22 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote:
> Kingsley, I agree with Erik.  Resource is the term everyone seems to 
> agree on.
> And "entity", too, is overloaded.  For example the 
> "Entity-Relationship model"
The Entity-Relationship model is actually deeply to connected to what 
Linked Data is all about. That's my fundamental point. Unfortunately, 
the connection is lost due to terminology choices in a lot of W3C and 
Web related literature.

Resource is an overloaded term. Entity isn't an overloaded term.

> On an earlier point you made, I agree that "denotes" is a good word.
> So, a URI denotes a resource, which may have several representations.

But that isn't the essence of what Dret is outlining. He is stating that 
a URIs can unambiguously identifies two resources in a 'describes' 
relationship. That isn't the same as stating that a URI can resolve to a 
variety of representations. Far from it.

The very problem I am trying to avert is already playing out in your 
response.

At this juncture you believe that the  "information resource" and "non 
information resource" distinction (which has been problematic for years) 
trumps the clarity of the term "entity" which basically implies 
anything, irrespective of realm, in existing technical and non technical 
literature?

Ultimately, there's no benefit in following a broken path for the sake 
of not ruffling feathers. Terminology should always seek to bridge 
existing work across connected realms. Thus far, poor terminology 
choices have remained the biggest hurdle to comprehending most 
initiatives associated with Linked Data, RDF, and the Semantic Web in 
general.

Links:

1. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2009Aug/0000.html -- some 
background history re. "Resource" in URI .

Kingsley
> All the best, Ashok
>
> On 10/4/2012 4:06 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> On 10/4/12 6:49 PM, Wilde, Erik wrote:
>>> hello kingsley.
>>>
>>>> +1
>>> thanks!
>>>
>>>> To something along the following lines:
>>>>     The Web can enables *entities* to be *denoted* by any (registered)
>>>> URI scheme.
>>>>     These entities can be represented by content associated with any
>>>> (registered) media type.
>>>>     In many cases, applications establish specific (i.e., typed) 
>>>> relations
>>>>     between entities, which can either be under their control, or
>>>> controlled by another authority.
>>> i'd rather stick with the term "resource", which is well established in
>>> many of the core web standards.
>>
>> I know you think that's the case, based on material out there. But, 
>> its going to change. Resource is an overloaded term.
>>
>>>   "entity" not so much, so while in the end
>>> it's just a different label for the same concept, it is one that i 
>>> don't
>>> want to introduce.
>>
>> You aren't really introducing anything, you are realigning with what 
>> already exists in literature that precedes the Web [1][2].
>>
>>>   and i am not quite sure what you think you're getting
>>> out of using this different label?
>>
>> Clarity is always my fundamental goal, use of existing (pre Web) 
>> terminology for the same fundamental concepts so that bridges can be 
>> built with other communities en route to a cohesive continuum. 
>> Disconnecting existing communities (many of which have long mastered 
>> these concepts) via choice of terminology ultimately stifles adoption.
>>
>>
>> Links:
>>
>> 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entity%E2%80%93relationship_model -- 
>> Entity modelling
>> 2. 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.
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>>
>>> dret.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>


-- 

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 Friday, 5 October 2012 11:37:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:17:32 UTC