W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > November 2010

Re: What would break, a question for implementors? (was Re: Is 303 really necessary?)

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:30:38 -0500
Message-ID: <4CD9CB8E.90001@openlinksw.com>
To: joel sachs <jsachs@csee.umbc.edu>
CC: nathan@webr3.org, Ian Davis <me@iandavis.com>, Pete Johnston <Pete.Johnston@eduserv.org.uk>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
On 11/9/10 5:04 PM, joel sachs wrote:
>> A URI is just an Identifier. We can't  "Describe" what isn't 
>> unambiguously Identified (Named);
> Kingsley,
> I think we can, though we might not be properly understood, e.g. 
> "Kingsley was great in Gandhi and Sexy Beast."
> Wasn't this part of the summer's argument regarding literals as 
> rdf:subjects , i.e. 


Let me be a little clearer re. my statement:

We can't produce high-fidelity descriptions of "Things" (Entities) if 
the description Subjects aren't unambiguously Identified.

I believe, via Linked Data,  we are seeking to produce high-fidelity 
Linked Data meshes that scale.

English is but one of several syntaxes.

Global scale is an integral goal of the mission, Methinks.



Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 22:31:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:29:51 UTC