- From: Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni@wup.it>
- Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 01:02:56 +0200
- To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>, semantic-web@w3.org
Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote: >>Yes, that's wat WWW does. Why ask SW to do it a different way? If a >>resource owner wants to make available an RDF representation of his >>resource, he is welcome to do so. WWW already supports that. But if >>his failure to do so has any impact on your life at all, you have the >>wrong expectations about what SW is. >> >>Even WWW doesn't break if the "owner" of a resource fails to make a >>representation available, the site is down for a period of time, never >>registered in DNS, or whatever. >> >> >> > >... right but, HTTP still provides a generic mechanism for retrieving an 'authoritative' representation of a resource (i.e. HTTP GET) - whether the resource exists or not does not diminish the requirement for such a mechanism. > >So the semantic web requires some generic mechanism whereby an agent can attempt to locate and query a set of RDF statements about the resource denoted by URI x that has been endorsed by some entity y - whether such statements exist or not similarly does not diminish the requirement. N.B. In the most common scenario, y is the owner of x. > >Cheers, > >Al. > > > My2C: while i think that controlling the DNS associated to a URL might be a good opportunity to define an "authoritative" answer, this is really not the "semantic web". On the sw everyone can say anything about anyone so that mechnism is just a small brick. If you want a system where you can find all that (participating) people have said about a given uri, you might want to take a look at the RDFGrowth P2P algorithm, Giovanni
Received on Friday, 1 April 2005 23:03:14 UTC