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

Re: Role of URI and HTTP in Linked Data

From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 08:08:29 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTikmJjgL5vgg7GAkRYKbTqvXut5ju-CpKjSV4gT1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Cc: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>, nathan@webr3.org, public-lod@w3.org
I agree with Kingsley, an "identifier" that "identifies" more than one
thing is a common name, not an identifier.

To say that a URI can identify multiple things is as meaningless as
saying that the string "Rob" identifies me.

That is all. Carry on.

Rob Sanderson

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
> 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: kidehen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2010 15:09:03 UTC

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