- From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 15:44:54 +0100
- To: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
- Cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Aaron, I have much sympathy with the concerns you raise. But... >:We :between ( [a :Rock] [ a :Place ; :feel :Hard ] ) . >"We're between a rock and a hard place." ... much as we might wish to fix this problem, I think that it's beyond our charter to do so, for reasons of backwards compatibility. #g -- At 09:33 AM 9/20/01 -0500, Aaron Swartz wrote: >On Thursday, September 20, 2001, at 04:44 AM, Graham Klyne wrote: >> URI-view = absoluteURI [ '#' fragment ] > >I didn't realize we'd get around to this issue so soon, but to warn the >Working Group, I believe that these "URI-views", or whatever we wish to >call them, should be removed from the RDF spec. It seems odd to claim >we're the "Resource Description Framework" when many of the identifiers we >use have no binding to Resources! > >RDF needs to respect the layers it's building on top of, and the URI spec >is one of those. > >More information on the issue is at: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001May/0137.html > >Which perhaps should be linked to rdfms-fragments on the Issues List. > >-- >[ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ] ------------ Graham Klyne (GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2001 10:55:07 UTC