- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 14:43:11 +0100
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 08:18 AM 6/15/01 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: >Graham Klyne wrote: > > > > At 02:29 AM 6/15/01 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: > > > > RDF absolutely has to make sense even outside the context of > > > > an enclosing document which can be given a uri. so ... > > > > > >So... what? That doesn't make any sense to me. > > > > > >An RDF document is an XML document. Each XML document > > >has a base URI (cf the infoset spec). > > > > If this is true, then it is not possible to transfer RDF data in transient > > protocol elements. > >Why not? Transient things are resources too; you may or >may not specify what their URI is (in the case >of a mail messge, it would be mid:....); that doesn't mean >they don't have one. Well, by definition (as I understand these things) it's only a resource if it has a URI. The fact that something can have a URI (and anything can, right?) doesn't mean that it's got one. (Not every mail message has a Message-ID header, from which the mid: is derived.) From a practical viewpoint, having a URI but not knowing what it is doesn't seem to be significantly different from not having a URI. > > Which means that (say) the CC/PP spec, formulated *by design* as a *format* > > only for client capability data, cannot be regarded as a valid RDF > application. > >I don't see how that follows. Because (by my lights) a CC/PP profile may be some data that doesn't have a URI. Which (by your lights) means that it cannot be valid XML hence not valid RDF. > > But what is the status of information that is not "on the Web"? > >Just think of everything as "on the Web". I don't. That sounds to me more like a religion, or act of faith, than a state of affairs. > It's a matter >of perspective. There aren't any constraints in the >design of the Web that allow you to deduce a contradiction >from saying "every document is on the Web". More important, I think, than the lack of a contradiction is a sense of common understanding (which, also, is an act of faith...). #g
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 09:48:15 UTC