- From: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 15:07:18 -0400
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- CC: "public-ldp-wg@w3.org" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>
On 06/06/2013 02:28 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 6/6/13 2:14 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >> On 6/6/13 1:56 PM, Alexandre Bertails wrote: >>> I have to say that I don't understand that part. How do you fix the >>> interpretation of ldp:Container to be its definition in the document >>> that you dereference at http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp? Isn't it introducing >>> something that is not defined in RDF? I thought that RDF was not >>> relying on HTTP on purpose. >> >> RDF is scoped to IRIs (which may or may not be HTTP scheme URIs) >> >> RDF based Linked Data is scoped to HTTP URIs. >> >> Hopefully, QED. > > A little clearer: > > 1. RDF is scoped to IRIs (which may or may not be HTTP scheme URIs) -- > its sole function (re. Model Theory aspect) is structured data > representation where the semantics of Relations are explicit rather than > implicit > > 2. Linked Data -- its prime goal is using HTTP URIs to denote Relations > that resolve to the meaning/sense of said Relations (so you end up with > a graph comprised of Relations that describes the HTTP URI's referent) > > 3. RDF based Linked Data -- combing both such that HTTP URIs resolve to > descriptions of URI Referents which is a wordy way of saying the HTTP > URIs resolve to an entity relationship graph endowed with *explicit* > entity relationship semantics that are human- and machine-comprehensible. > > Thus: > > 1. > http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/html/http/www.w3.org/ns/ldp%01Container > -- an HTML document that describes ldp:Container via an entity > relationship graph based description > > 2. see footer section of the page above for alternative representations > of the same entity relationship graph based description. > > Hopefully, QED :-) I'm sorry Kingsley. I always feel very stupid when I read your answers. I mean, I try really hard to understand what you're saying, and it looks all regular English to me (as you know, I'm not a native English speaker). But you refer to concepts that I don't know or have never seen together. I always fail to connect your answers with the questions being asked. And most of the time it looks to me that they address a broader scope than what this group is trying to achieve. So please don't take it bad if I don't answer any of your emails and excuse me again. Alexandre.
Received on Thursday, 6 June 2013 19:07:31 UTC