Re: Getting to closure on the remaining issues

On 1/24/14 11:54 AM, Henry Story wrote:
> 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...
>
>

+1

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen