- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 23:59:07 +0000
- To: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
- Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 21 Dec 2011, at 08:54, Antoine Zimmermann wrote: > Le 20/12/2011 21:55, Steve Harris a écrit : >> [skip] >> >> I think most(?) people agree that a URI should denote/name/something >> a graph, or some other entity, but not both at the same time. The >> problem is that people don't follow this rule in RDF now*, don't >> follow it in quads as implemented now, and I don't think they will >> follow it in the future. >> >> So, does that break RDF, or does it break their applications? >> >> If it just breaks people's applications, then we can write what we >> would like to happen in the document, and people who do the Right >> Thing™ will be fine, and people who don't will suffer in some way. >> >> If on the other hand it breaks RDF, it's probably already too late, >> and we have a problem. >> >> - Steve >> >> * e.g. http://blog.iandavis.com/2010/11/04/is-303-really-necessary/ > > I haven't read the whole post but where do you see a URI which is used to denote two different things at the same time? How do you know it denotes 2 things simultaneously? Well, if I have a document like: <http://example.com/foo> a <Thing> . and then I dereference http://example.com/foo, and get a 200 and a document back, isn't http://example.com/foo both an instance and a document? Maybe I missed something though. - Steve -- Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK +44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/ Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11 Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2011 23:59:35 UTC