- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 19:13:32 +0000
- CC: David Wood <david.wood@talis.com>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
missed a reference.. in-line Nathan wrote: > David Wood wrote: >> On Mar 1, 2011, at 05:32, Nathan wrote: >>> Nathan wrote: >>>> David Wood wrote: >>>>> On Feb 24, 2011, at 13:12, Pat Hayes wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> It is much simpler: it is just wanting the WG to acknowledge that >>>>>> "an RDF graph" can either be a mathematical set, or it can be some >>>>>> kind of document or data structure or file than can be transmitted >>>>>> over a computer network. But it can't be both. >>>>> What is the difference between an "RDF graph" and a RESTful >>>>> "resource"? What is the difference between an "RDF graph token" >>>>> and a RESTful "representation"? >>>> REST maps a resource to a set of values over time, each single value >>>> has a 1:N relationship with representations, "RDF Graph" (the >>>> mathematical set, platonic abstraction, g-snap) equates to a single >>>> value, and "RDF Graph Token" equates to a representation of that >>>> single value. >>> REST maps a resource to a set of values over time, each single value >>> is a representation, representation equates to "RDF Graph Token" (a >>> chunk of rdf/xml or turtle, a g-text in Sandro's mail). >>> >>> The g-snap, or abstract graph, isn't a concept which relates to any >>> REST concept, rather it is something specific to our RDF use-cases, >>> in that we have a platonic abstraction, a mathematical set of >>> triples, which we juggle different realizations of (from in memory >>> structures through to serializations and so forth). >>> >>> So, to re-answer your question, "RDF Graph" is a term we've used to >>> refer to both the abstract set of triples, and the realizations of. >>> The only thing which equates anywhere near a "RESTful resource" in >>> our communities are "Named Graphs" and of course linked data which >>> uses RESTful resources, we GET <u> to retrieve a realization of an >>> abstract set of triples, to get some RDF in some format. >> >> Pardon me for saying so, but that doesn't make sense to me. >> >> A RESTful resource may be anything: "the intended *conceptual* target >> of a hypertext reference" was one way Roy Fielding put it (emphasis >> mine). There is no reason I can see that an abstract, mathematical >> concept cannot be a RESTful resource. > > I don't really want to drag this subject up on this list, unless the > chairs / team contacts think it's worth it. So I'll merely point to a > discussion on this: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-awwsw/2011Mar/0002.html and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-awwsw/2011Mar/0005.html > do also see the replies which clarifies the two world views of IRs, and > the third world view of no IRs just anythings. cheers
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2011 19:14:27 UTC