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: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2012 10:52:33 -0700
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Cc: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF679482C9.DD89841D-ON88257A90.00607197-88257A90.00623215@us.ibm.com>
Sorry Kingsley but I have to side with others on this issue. Resource is 
undeniably the term that is commonly in use for the web and the W3C is 
using (see Architecture of the World Wide Web [1] and W3C's index of terms 
[2]). LDP is not the place to depart from it.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/
[2] http://www.w3.org/Architecture/Terms.html

I also have to say that I'm puzzled by your claim that "entity" is not 
overloaded. Looking at W3C's index of terms again I see it already has 
several possible definitions, none of which are the one you refer to.

But I appreciate your desire to bridge communities and if you were 
interested in developing a document that explains how the different 
terminologies relate to one another this would be a valuable contribution. 
We could reference it from the LDP WG page and maybe make it an annex to 
the spec. Is this something you would be interested in doing?

Best regards.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group


Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote on 10/05/2012 05:05:20 AM:

> From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
> To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>, 
> Cc: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
> Date: 10/05/2012 05:07 AM
> Subject: Re: ldp-ISSUE-15 (sharing binary resources and metadata): 
> sharing    binary resources and metadata [Linked Data Platform core]
> 
> On 10/5/12 7:58 AM, Henry Story wrote:
> > On 5 Oct 2012, at 13:45, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> 
wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/5/12 4:29 AM, Henry Story wrote:
> >>> On 5 Oct 2012, at 01:22, Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> 
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"
> >>>>
> >>>> 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.
> >>>> All the best, Ashok
> >>> +1 Let's please stick to vocabulary well understood in the semantic 
web
> >>> space.
> >> Is this the target audience? You know that statement opens up a 
> can of worms, one I am not going to push right now.
> > The easiest way to steal a jewel from someone would be to pretend 
> to the owner
> > that it is ugly, and instead give them fake plastic jewellery 
> instead in exchange.
> >
> >
> >>> Debates there have gone on for years, and there is no need to 
duplicate
> >>> them here.
> >> Yes, but not for the reason you espouse. You are making an 
> assumption about the target audience that I think is actually 
> incorrect. I don't believe the semantic web community (whatever that
> actually means) is the target audience.
> > I don't think we want silly nomenclature debates here.
> 
> I don't think I am seeking any kind of *silly nomenclature* debate here, 

> or anywhere else.
> 
> Again, I am only interested in clarity through terminology that build 
> bridges to other communities. My comments are always loaded and driven 
> by experience across many realms, as I am sure you know by now.
> 
> My comments and positions aren't hard to find online. Luckily, history 
> is building up so you can easily correlate my positions re. these 
> matters. I am interested in learning from past mistakes and getting them 

> fixed when moving forward. That's it.
> 
> >
> >>
> >>> By all means if someone feels like writing an introductory book
> >>> for people coming from different traditions into this work, then
> do it: you'll
> >>> probably sell a lot of books and make a nice sum.
> >> Again, you are mistaken about the target audience.
> >>
> >> You this this is abobut [LDP] -->[Semantic Web].
> >>
> >> I actually believe it's about: [LDP] --> [Rest of the Pragmatic 
World] .
> > The semantic web is very pragmatic, I am using it all the time.
> 
> Not my point.
> 
> > It has evolved some concepts that are designed to work well with REST, 
and
> > it is easy to see that.
> 
> Not my point of concern.
> 
> >   There is no need to play into delaying tactics
> > by trying to please people who will never be pleased whatever you 
> do, however
> > you explain it.
> 
> There you make a fundamental mistake. I am not targeting an audience 
> with "R-D-F Reflux Syndrome" I am more interested in a realm of folks 
> that already understand this subject matter, the only thing that 
> confuses them is new terminology disconnected from mainstream literature 

> etc..
> 
> >
> >>>   But whatever convention we
> >>> choose is going to be deemed arbitrary - that is what 
> conventions are: a selection
> >>> among arbitrary options, in order to facilitate coordination. 
> Using non semantic
> >>> web or webbish vocabulary is just going to confuse people in the
> semweb side
> >>> and people in the other spaces.
> >> People outside the semantic web community already understand the 
following:
> >>
> >> 1. entities
> >> 2. entity relationships
> >> 3. entity relationship semantics
> >> 4. relations
> >> 5. relations and state
> >> 6. identifiers
> >> 7. name resolution
> >> 8. structured data representation (via entity relationship graphs)
> >> 9. data models
> >> 10. across the wire data serialization formats
> >> 11. denotation
> >> 12. connotation
> >> 13. indirection
> >> 14. first-order logic
> >> 12. etc..
> >
> > Many of the terms are completely acceptable in the Semantic Web 
> and Linked Data vacabulary.
> 
> And they are known and understood by many outside the communities you 
> outline.
> 
> Kingsley
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Kingsley
> >>
> >>
> >>> Henry
> >>>
> >>>> 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.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>> Social Web Architect
> >>> http://bblfish.net/
> >>>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >>
> >> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > Social Web Architect
> > http://bblfish.net/
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 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 Sunday, 7 October 2012 17:53:08 UTC

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