On 11/11/10 9:00 AM, David Booth wrote: > On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 07:23 +0100, Jiří Procházka wrote: > [ . . . ] >> I think it is flawed trying to enforce "URI == 1 thing" > Exactly right. The "URI == 1 thing" notion is myth #1 in "Resource > Identity and Semantic Extensions: Making Sense of Ambiguity": > http://dbooth.org/2010/ambiguity/paper.html#myth1 > It is a good *goal*, but it is inherently unachievable. Are you implying that a URI -- an Identifier -- doesn't have a Referent (singular)? If so, what is the URI identifying? In my world view: Identification != Representation. The fact that I can de-reference an Identifier en route to obtaining Data doesn't make the Identifier a Representation of the Data. It's a conduit to the Data. [SNIP] -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehenReceived on Thursday, 11 November 2010 14:43:02 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:29:51 UTC