- From: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 15:08:52 -0400
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- CC: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
On 06/05/2013 02:36 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 6/5/13 2:26 PM, Alexandre Bertails wrote: >> On 06/05/2013 02:05 PM, Henry Story wrote: >>> >>> Well, I just proved it from basic principles. You can decide not to >>> be convinced, but that is beyond the reaches of reason then. If you >>> explained what did not convince you then one could progress. >> >> Henry, I just wanted to make clear that I didn't agree that you proved >> anything. The same questions remain: text/turtle does not tell you >> that you can infer the interaction with a resource by looking at its >> RDF type. > > Do you agree that RDF based Linked Data principles (TimBL's meme) We're defining LDP, a concrete specification, with a formal process and a group of people. So with all respect to TimBL, I don't care about the meme you're talking about. > imply > that the URIs in a Turtle doc denote entities such that when > de-referenced you end up with a description of the URI's referent? Let's > at least cross or not cross this bridge, as a first step. You guys keep talking about description/presentation. That's not the question as we have already all agreed on using RDF to expose the LDP model. The question is to know what HTTP interactions are allowed with RDF resources found in a text/turtle document. You act as if RDF was equivalent to a media type when it comes to HTTP interactions (again, not just the trivial ones like GET). But RDF is just a data model. It does not define a REST API. Alexandre. > > Kingsley >> >> Alexandre. >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>> >>> Social Web Architect >>> http://bblfish.net/ >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > >
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 19:09:01 UTC