W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > December 2013

Re: ISSUE-148: RDF Concepts - IRIs do *not* always denote the same resource

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 20:07:04 +0000
Cc: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <7D10A783-7391-4E74-8D11-354E22D4C90B@cyganiak.de>
To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
On 16 Dec 2013, at 19:47, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote:
>> One more attempt at a slight improvement:
>> 
>> [[ IRIs have global scope. Thus, two different appearances of an IRI
>> denote the same resource. Violating this principle constitutes an IRI
>> collision [WEBARCH]. ]]
>> 
>> Where “IRI collision” links to
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#URI-collision
> 
> I think using the term "IRI collision" is a very good idea,

Good.

> though I think it is also good to explicitly mention inconsistencies or interoperability problems.  

I disagree. The WEBARCH reference explains the interoperability problems. The fact that these interoperability problems may manifest themselves as inconsistencies is irrelevant here, and too much detail.

> But the phrasing above falls short because it lacks the word "should" or similar.  As written it is like saying "I will *definitely* call you tomorrow.  But if I don't . . . .”

The bullet point is preceded by this sentence:

[[
A very brief, informal and partial account follows:
]]

That’s enough of a caveat.

There’s also precedent form WEBARCH:

[[
Since the scope of a URI is global, the resource identified by a URI does not depend on the context in which the URI appears.
]]
http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#id-resources

And then a couple of paragraphs later it explains the consequence of violating the constraint just stated. Not a “should” in sight. If this kind of phrasing is good enough for normative text in Architecture of World Wide Web, then it’s surely good enough for a “very brief, informal and partial account” in the informative introduction to RDF Concepts.

Richard
Received on Monday, 16 December 2013 20:07:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:37 UTC