- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 12:39:37 -0400
- To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <51B60149.5010800@openlinksw.com>
On 6/10/13 12:12 PM, Wilde, Erik wrote: >> Perhaps we could do the HTTP/RDF community a favor to register the >> >relation >> >http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type to the shorthand "type" >> >so that >> >the above could become >> >Link:<http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#Container>; rel="type" > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6903#section-6 So at least we have agreement on the semantics of the "type" Relation i.e., it denotes the same concept as <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>. Thus, you have: Link: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#Container>; rel="type" having the same meaning as the 3-tuple: { <> a ldp:Container } Which goes to demonstrate that RDF's abstract syntax has nothing to do with Media Types. This simple example shows that RDF model theory semantics (which are abstract in nature) can be applied at the following levels: 1. HTTP 2. RDF documents 3. Even HTML documents -- by using <link/> reflect the very same Relation semantics expressed via the Link: header. -- 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
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Monday, 10 June 2013 16:40:00 UTC