- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:07:45 +0000
- To: Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>
- CC: public-powderwg@w3.org
Thanks, this is helpful. Jeremy Phil Archer wrote: > Thanks for this, Jeremy. > > The requirement concerning components and individual assertions having > identifiers is badly worded but what it was supposed to convey was that > if we say that a resource is red and square that there should be a way > of differentiating those two assertions. In effect, this means using > vocabularies with terms that have URIs. So that I could in theory say > that I agree with your assertion that 'it' is square but assert that in > my view actually it's brown. > > As you recognise, this is at the edge of the requirements - the main > thing is to be able to identify that a bunch of resources has a bunch of > properties that I'm interested in and who says that the resources have > those properties. > > Phil. > > Jeremy Carroll wrote: >> >> >> I have read >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/NOTE-powder-use-cases-20071031/ >> >> and found it a clear and easy to follow document. >> >> >> I have one question, concerning 3.1.10 >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/NOTE-powder-use-cases-20071031/#identity >> >> [[ >> DRs, their components and individual assertions should have unique and >> unambiguous identifiers. >> ]] >> >> I found that the use cases did motivate the weaker requirement >> [[ >> DRs should have unique and unambiguous identifiers. >> ]] >> >> but I wondered how much would be lost if "components and individual >> assertions" did not have "unique and unambiguous identifiers". >> >> I note that in a way this requirement interacts with 3.1.3 Groupng, >> and 3.1.4 Composite Assertions, in that if I assert that some group of >> resources has some composite property, I have implicitly asserted that >> a particular resource has a particular property, but that implicit >> assertion is unlikely to have identity in the sense of 3.1.10; and >> some functionality will be lost - but I doubt this was crucial >> functionality. >> >> Jeremy > >
Received on Friday, 14 December 2007 13:08:16 UTC