Re: Benifit of over linked data or vice versa

On 6/2/14 9:40 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
> When TimBL originally wrote
>  it was largely a
> response to the indirect linking model we'd been using in the FOAF
> project.


I wouldn't say using HTTP URIs for unambiguous denotation of entities 
was a response to FOAF. It just so happened that FOAF provided a nice 
anecdote [1] for making the point. It's hard to explain why "You" need 
an HTTP URI that denotes "You" unambiguously if there's nothing in place 
to support and demonstrate the utility of a common practice in the 
real-world that's simply being exploitable via the Web medium.

As you know, unambiguous HTTP URI based entity denotation dates back to 
the very notion of a World Wide Web  (on Paper and inside TimBL's head) 
[2][3] :-)

How all of this got lost I will never know, but I do challenge anyone to 
image the real-world without:

1. words -- that denoted things unambiguously
2. terms -- that denoted things unambiguously
3. sentences comprised of ambiguous words
4. statements comprised of ambiguous terms.

If RDF had been promoted (from the onset) as a Language rather than a 
Format (specifically RDF/XML) we wouldn't still be deliberating these 
matters circa., 2014.


[1] -- Get Yourself a URI post by TimBL

[2] -- original WWW proposal (this couldn't 
include live HTTP URIs since the Web was at the proposal stage)

[3] -- original WWW proposal embellished with live 
HTTP URIs that denote entities.



Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web:
Personal Weblog:
Twitter Profile:
Google+ Profile:
LinkedIn Profile:

Received on Monday, 2 June 2014 15:33:02 UTC