- From: Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 12:23:38 +0100
- To: Jonathan Rees <jonathan.rees@gmail.com>
- CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, public-semweb-lifesci <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Jonathan, > The httpRange-14 resolution [1] is about identification (of a thing > by/to an http server), not reference. "httpRange-14" is an *engineer* but not a *philosophical/ontological* solution because a server response code such as 200/303/404 etc. do not tell you more about what you already know or don't know about the URI. For instance, if I 303 redirect your potato URI to an RDF document, where I am talking about anything but your potato. Would I be wrong? I don't think so because I might be such a bad/excellent philosopher who happens to think everything is related. HTTP specs is an engineer protocol, it instructs how client/server suppose to communicate. But HTTP spec does not govern the meaning of the returned resource/thing. AWWW just happens to ride on top of it and give it some interpretation. HttpRange-14 is *not* about identification but is a solution to relate and disambiguite two closely related things. There is nothing wrong if one URI is used to identify both me and my RDF representation. It just makes it difficult to talk about the RDF-less me and the me-less RDF. Xiaoshu
Received on Friday, 12 October 2007 11:24:18 UTC