- From: Oskar Welzl <lists@welzl.info>
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 01:13:13 +0200
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
- Cc: Reto Bachmann-Gmür <rbg@talis.com>
Hi Reto, I noticed you switched the lists; great. Am Montag, den 27.08.2007, 23:37 +0200 schrieb Reto Bachmann-Gmür: > > Identifiying a document is not the same as identifying a blog, even if > > the document is part of the blog. I can make statements about this one > > document that are not true for the blog and vice versa. > > > > Whats the point I'm missing? Or am I being fussy here again? ;) > > > This might have to do with the notion of "Document". For TimBL a > document is something more abstract than a sequence of bytes and a > media-type. > > On http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/HTTP-URI.html TBL wrote: > > > > I want to make it clear that such things are generic (See Generic > > Resources) <http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Generic> -- while they are > > documents, they generally are abstractions which may have many > > different bit representations, as a function of, for example: > I guess that using the term "Informartion Resource" rather than > "document" is less prone to misunderstandings. OK, in saying that the whole thing at http://oskar.twoday.net/ is an "Information Resource" (which happens to include postings from 2003-2007, a service that lets you register, get email notifications on updates, post via text messages, gets the owner some money from google ads etc.) you get around it - I can see your wicked plot now ;) I'm still uneasy about it, though. If I accept that <http://oskar.twoday.net/> is the whole weblog rather than the HTML document served there, how can somebody make statements about the one document in a different context without creating wrong information or contradictions? And wouldn't this be quite similar to saying books:thebible eg:boughtAt <http://www.someshop.net> with <http://www.someshop.net> being a) a shop b) created with dreamweaver c) doesn't validate c) founded by Amazon d) copyright 2007 by TheBestWebDesignFactory, Inc.? Or, in other words, isn't <http://oskar.twoday.net/>, the weblog, something like the document that's also a car (or maybe only a car?) from http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/HTTP-URI.html revisited? I know I'm pushing things here, but I spotted RDF on my radar years ago but keep throwing all my half-finished work away each time I try using it, only because of this URI-thing... And I'm determined to get it right this time. There *has* to be a way to make people like me understand ;) Thanks, Oskar
Received on Monday, 27 August 2007 23:13:31 UTC