- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 13:01:50 -0600
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>, nathan@webr3.org, public-lod@w3.org
On Nov 11, 2010, at 8:42 AM, Kingsley Idehen 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. True. But the suggestion embodied in http-range-14 is that IF you get a 'normal' 200-coded access response, THEN we should all agree that the IRI does in fact refer to the data-thing it accesses. And for all its awkwardness and wierdness, this does seem like a workable and useful convention. I think its like democracy: its stinks, but all other alternatives are worse. > 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 > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2010 19:02:28 UTC