Re: Section 4: LDPR/non-LDPR formal definitions

On 26 Mar 2013, at 22:34, Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu> wrote:

> hello kingley.
> 
> On 2013-03-26 14:14 , Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> It mentions URI and dereference.
>> "..Turtle is a general-purpose assertion language; applications may
>> evaluate given data
>>     to infer more assertions or to dereference URIs ..."
>> Of course it could be much more precise re. RDF based Linked Data.
> 
> but that's pretty much exactly what henry was linking to in the RDF 1.1 spec. it vaguely hints at a possibility, does not say how to interact (probably assuming you just try a GET), and is read-only.

I'd love to know how you think that adding a new mime type to Turtle would help you
work out wether a resource should not just be GETable but also perhaps POSTable, or
DELETEable, etc... How is this trick going to work?

> 
>> Beyond hypermedia basics, we do have an omission re. RDF based Linked
>> Data. That's were I believe our views converge :-)
> 
> calling the above "may statement" hypermedia basics is a very optimistic view of the world. keep in mind that not all URIs in RDF are hypermedia links.

So adding a new mime type is going to help solve this problem how? You'd still have RDF but now somehow it would be obvious that URNs would not be dereferenceable? 

Btw, perhaps you'd care to elaborate on "not all URIs in RDF are hypermedia links". Can you give us a few examples?

> if your format uses URIs as identifiers, but provides no way to distinguish identifiers from hypermedia affordances, i wouldn't really call it a hypermedia format.

What is a hypermedia affordance?

> i am with richard here, who just said: "[Turtle is] is fundamentally suited for hypermedia apps." it certainly is, but it needs hypermedia semantics to be a foundation for those apps, or those apps have to add the hypermedia semantics themselves, each of them individually.

So you are saying we need perhaps a whole new semantics. Have you read the RDF semantics carefully?
    http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/
Is your project that we need something like this but a hypermedia version? That seems like a huge task
and perhaps a bit out of scope for this working group.

Or is it that you think that just adding a new mime type profile is enough to do the whole semantic
heavy lifting? That would indeed by an amazing feat. In one simple stroke of a pen we'd make all 
these logicians useless.

Henry

> 
> cheers,
> 
> dret.
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/