- From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:12:06 -0500
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
On Thursday, July 12, 2001, at 03:39 PM, pat hayes wrote:
>>> 1. Are anonymous resources allowed in the abstract graph syntax?
>> Not explicitly... I mean, I'm fine with triples stating anonymity,
> ?? That reads like an oxymoron to me. How can one state
> anonymity without referring to the thing in question, thereby
> rendering it not anonymous?
OK, perhaps not anonymity then... more something along the lines
of the various properties people are interested in assigning to
anonymous nodes.
>>> No specific mechanism for generating such URIs is mandated,
>>> but the following options might be considered:
>>
>> This is the problem I have. I think all parsers should spit
>> out equivalent genids for the same document -- the spec should
>> mandate the genid to use.
>
> Than it's not a genid. The global uniqueness of the token (not
> type) is part of what makes the genid idea work, seems to me.
> If my parser has to use the same id as your parser, then why
> not just include that id in the syntax?
Well, I wish they would have, but people are lazy sometimes and
they don't like typing in lots of genids. So I see the syntax as
an abbreviation more than anything else.
--
"Aaron Swartz" | Blogspace
<mailto:me@aaronsw.com> | <http://blogspace.com/about/>
<http://www.aaronsw.com/> | weaving the two-way web
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2001 17:12:31 UTC