- From: Michel_Dumontier <Michel_Dumontier@carleton.ca>
- Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:01:44 -0400
- To: "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: "W3C HCLSIG hcls" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
> I just want to focus on the essence of my comments to Michel and Peter > who have issues with the use of 303 redirection to achieve separation > of > datum identity from descriptive representation, when using a particular > URI scheme. > > I am simply interested in explaining to them what this is trying to > achieve since it remains a strange point of contention. I use the word > "strange" because I believe that the mechanics of the process are > obscuring the fundamental concept in play: Object Identity. And I'm trying to explain that there is no pragmatic reason to make explicit the distinction between a biomolecule (and what we know about it) and a database record (and what we know about the biomolecule) unless they are actually different. It just complicates things in a wholly unnecessary way. Your talk of identity does not address this problem. Increasing the complexity of the model, without citing its benefits (and acknowledging its disadvantages) will certainly not convince me. Yet, as others have noted, we are not facing a problem whose solution is this record/entity distinction. That being said, it may surprise you that I've been a proponent giving pointers to documents where description may vary (for example http://ontology.dumontierlab.com/Protein). But if you're just gonna redirect me to your one defining document (from a database no less) where you can attach all the document metadata you want anyways - why bother! LOL. -=Michel=- > > Kingsley > > > > Cheers, > > Bijan. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > President & CEO > OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 24 March 2009 18:03:21 UTC