- From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
- Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:08:53 +0100
- To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
All, Another problem with the Dataset protocol: It seems to talk about direct and indirect graph identification in two different contexts. The first is to distinguish between direct (i.e. GET the request-URI) and indirect graph identification (i.e. use a graph query parameter). For want of a better term, I think this is OK. However, in section 4.1, about direct graph identification, it says "However, in using a URI in this way, we are not directly identifying an RDF graph but rather the RDF graph content that is represented by an RDF document, which is a serialization of that graph." I must admit that I cannot se how this usage is founded in Webarch. Quite to the contrary, when webarch talks about indirect identification, it is something quite different: http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#indirect-identification In RDF terms, this kind of indirect identification would amount to something like: <uri-of-nadia> foaf:mbox <mailto:nadia@example.com> or <uri-of-british-prime-minister> ex:residence [ vcard:adr "10 Downing Street" ] I must admit that I get a bad gut feeling whenever I hear that a URI indirectly identifies something, so perhaps my gut feeling clouds my rational evaluation, but it seems wrong to me. Best, Kjetil -- Kjetil Kjernsmo Ph.d Research Fellow, Semantic Web kjetil@kjernsmo.net http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/
Received on Friday, 25 March 2011 09:09:31 UTC