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

On 11/9/10 6:01 PM, joel sachs wrote:
>
> I guess what surprises me is your use of "can't" in "We can't produce 
> ..." instead of "shouldn't", as in "We shouldn't produce high fidelity 
> descriptions of things that aren't unambiguosly identified, because if 
> we do, there will be no reliable way to merge descriptions from 
> different sources."
>
> I think  it's obvious that we "can" since we do it all the time. That 
> we shouldn't may be true, although it is, I think you'll agree, a 
> contested claim.
Naturally, of course. Just my opinion.

Everything I say is inherently subjective :-)

Kingsley
>
> Joel.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2010, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>
>> 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. 
>>
>> Joel,
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kingsley Idehen    President&  CEO
>> OpenLink Software
>> Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 

Regards,

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 23:43:50 UTC