- From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:54:14 +0100
- To: Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org>
- Cc: "Kingsley (Uyi) Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, "public-ldp-wg@w3.org Working Group" <public-ldp-wg@w3.org>, Arnaud LeHors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
On 24 Jan 2014, at 17:38, Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org> wrote: > On 01/24/2014 10:29 AM, Henry Story wrote: >> >> On 24 Jan 2014, at 16:27, Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org> wrote: >> >>> On 01/24/2014 10:07 AM, Henry Story wrote: >>>> >>>> On 24 Jan 2014, at 15:55, Alexandre Bertails <bertails@w3.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 01/24/2014 09:15 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >>>>>> On 1/24/14 3:11 AM, Henry Story wrote: >>>>>>>> Somewhere inhttp://www.w3.org/ns/ldp.html, at the fragment-id >>>>>>>>> #Container, I expect to find something saying that ldp:Container when >>>>>>>>> used with rel=profile denotes the Container interaction model as >>>>>>>>> defined inhttp://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/#the-right-id. >>>>>>> You can not do things like that in RDF. You can not have a URI >>>>>>> denote one thing if it is related to by one relation, and another thing >>>>>>> if it is related to by another relation. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Alexandre, >>>>>> >>>>>> Wouldn't you be better served by providing an example of what you mean? >>>>>> Like Henry, I don't understand what you mean i.e., how you would express >>>>>> what you claim using RDF. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#Container> a rdf:Class ; >>>>> dc:description "when use with with rel=profile, denotes the Container interaction model as defined inhttp://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/#the-right-id" . >>>> >>>> This suggests that with another relation ldp:Container denotes something else. Yet a URI always only >>>> denotes one thing. That is core to the notion of a URI, and clearly written out in the ldp semantics. >>> >>> I still don't understand. Can you say where it's "clearly written out"? >>> >>> In plain English: ldp:Container happens to be a class that can be used >>> to denote the Container interaction model when used with >>> rel=profile. What's wrong in that sentence? >> >> What does it denote when it is not used with rel=profile? > > Then the behavior is not defined. It's ok because we're only > interested in defining what it means when we use it with rel=profile, > or when you use it as a class. A URI refers to one thing. This is not a question of behaviour. That is how URIs are defined. [[ A Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) provides a simple and extensible means for identifying a resource. ]] It follows therfore from that that ldp:Container URI would denote the "Container interaction model" whatever the relation that relates to it. > > Almost all programming languages I know have something similar: a > class is itself an object that you can pass around at runtime to use > it. And sometimes, your program doesn't know what to do because it's > not defined. Classes are first-class citizens (no pun intended) in RDF > so you can do the same. You are trying to import procedural programming language presuppositions into declarative logic. But that does not work. That's the type of thinking that leads to XMLRPC, SOAP, etc... > > Alexandre. > >> >> Henry >> >>> >>> Alexandre. >>> >>>> >>>> Henry >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Alexandre. >>>> >>>> Social Web Architect >>>> http://bblfish.net/ >> >> Social Web Architect >> http://bblfish.net/ Social Web Architect http://bblfish.net/
Received on Friday, 24 January 2014 16:55:40 UTC