- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:17:28 -0500
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, public-rdf-comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
On Jul 18, 2012, at 1:01 PM, David Booth wrote: > Hi Richard, > > On Wed, 2012-07-18 at 10:13 +0100, Richard Cyganiak wrote: >> David, >> >> On 16 Jul 2012, at 03:52, David Booth wrote: > [ . . . ] >>> I suggest changing "genid" to "bnode" or "blanknode". >> >> There was a poll between the alternatives "bnode", "genid" and >> "skolem" here: >> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-05-25 >> >> "genid" won. IIRC the argument that carried the day against "bnode" >> was: "It's not a bnode." > > No, of course it isn't, it's a URI. But it is *for* a bnode. No, its not "for" a bnode. It really has nothing to do with the bnode as such. It refers to something that the bnode says exists. The WG decided, I think correctly, that using the phrasing "bnode" in the URI name would be likely to be misunderstood as saying that the URI was something like a bnode, or perhaps was a bnode in disguise, or was a name for the bnode, or something equally misleading and confusing. > My > website is called http://dbooth.org/ because it is *for* me, not because > it *is* me. And the relationship between the skolem IRI and the bnode it is generated to substitute for is nothing at all like the relationship between you and your website. > > Since the WG has already chosen the name "genid", the WG will have to > decide whether this input constitutes sufficient grounds to reconsider > the name. But I really think the WG will be better helping the > community by choosing a name that is more clearly suggestive of its > purpose. What do you take the "purpose" to be? > In debugging and validating sem web applications people > routinely visually inspect the data, looking at what URIs are used and > where they came from. (There may well be other .well-known URIs that > become widely used in the future, so the fact that a bnode URI is minted > within .well-known will not necessarily be much of a visual clue.) > "genid" is a totally generic name that is already used for many other > purposes. See for example, Microsoft's GenID object for generating > globally unique identifiers: But this is a very similar purpose: generation of a gloabally unique 'new' name. The term is also used explicilty by Cyc for skolem names, by the way, for exactly this reason. > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee796748%28v=cs.10%29.aspx > OTOH "bnode" or "blanknode" would not be generic, and would clearly > correspond directly to established RDF terminology, just as my website > name *corresponds* to the name of my person and helps people to > instantly recognize that it is a website *for* me. > > P.S. A tongue-in-cheek suggestion: the-uri-formerly-known-as-a-bnode ;) We actually did consider this for a few seconds. Pat > > Thanks > > -- > David Booth, Ph.D. > http://dbooth.org/ > > Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily > reflect those of his employer. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ 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, 19 July 2012 17:18:06 UTC