RE: Another Translator for RDF

his #this is NOT attached to my yorkporc URI. There is no entity with such name in my card. His #this is not even attached to the (URI=typed) parameter in the translating services invocation URI. The transalation is service is of the form http://translate.me/doit?uri=http://google/yorkporc/#me*op=n3&html=1 (properly url-encoded, in reality) Onto the end of that he stuck a #this. He could have stuck a #that, but was alluding to the semantics we all know from C++'s this. We all learned #this, in moving from C to C++! (If you use extension methods in C#, its gets even more fun.) http://translate.me/doit?uri=http://google/yorkporc/#me*op=n3&html=1#this we are used to thinking of things in ontology land, where properties are assigned to fragments. In N3 its even a cute syntax: "foaf:openid" But, note how the above is not such a thing, neither on the base URI nor on the parameter URI. Its "stuffed on the end of the querystring". If the query URI was the (parameterized) address of the endpoint producting documents, stick #this on the end and now its the name of said result. now http://translate.me/doit?uri=http://google/yorkporc/#me*op=n3&html=1#this can (meaninfully) be the subject of the owl:sameAs. And now Ill shut up, as I'm way out of my depth and highly likely to drown. I just think "endpoints", and my head stops hurting.
 > From: mo.mcroberts@bbc.co.uk
> Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 09:14:28 +0000
> CC: kidehen@openlinksw.com; public-xg-webid@w3.org; imitko@openlinksw.com
> To: home_pw@msn.com
> Subject: Re: Another Translator for RDF
> 
> 
> On 30 Dec 2011, at 06:59, Peter Williams wrote:
> 
> > I think I have just learned (and im leaping here) that there is just like in C++ a magic #fragment name called "this". I dont have a literal in my stream named #this, though - any more than I have such a literal in C++ structure. OK. Wonderful. That makes sense (by analogy with C++). I now have a way to always name what is otherwise an address (causing endless fuss).
> 
> No; #this isn’t magic — indeed, having a fragment at all isn't magic (you can claim to be a resource if you really want to, but you usually don’t want to). What you pick as your fragment (to differentiate things from resources) doesn’t matter, so long as you’re consistent about it for that thing.
> 
> 
> I’m a tad confused — I guess I’ve missed a message somewhere — looking at:
> 
> http://yorkporc2.blogspot.com/
> 
> …you’re consistent about using <http://yorkporc2.blogspot.com/#me> as your identifier.
> 
> Looking at:
> 
> http://rdf-translator.appspot.com/parse?url=http%3A%2F%2Fyorkporc2.blogspot.com%2F&of=n3&html=1
> 
> I’m not seeing any incidence of 'this' in the N3 — it’s exactly as in the RDFa:
> 
> @prefix ns1: <http://yorkporc2.blogspot.com/#> .
> 
> ns1:me a foaf:Person; ...
> 
> …which expands to:
> 
> <http://yorkpc2.blogspot.com#me> a foaf:Person ; ...
> 
> I can't see why you'd want to use '#this' with either of those resources.
> 
> M.
> 
> -- 
> Mo McRoberts - Technical Lead - The Space,
> 0141 422 6036 (Internal: 01-26036) - PGP key CEBCF03E,
> Project Office: Room 7083, BBC Television Centre, London W12 7RJ
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/
> This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
> If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
> Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
> Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
> Further communication will signify your consent to this.
> 					
>