Re: Identification Problem [was: Re: Suggested EARL Changes]

> Certainly, although I don't see how we, when we're
> external to the resource, can know enough to state
> that some resource is newer version of the old.

The resource doesn't change, just the representations.

> My point is [not?] that we're introducing anything new,
> just that we're introducing the idea that testSubject/reprOf
> is threaded [...]

Well, the idea of a resource is threaded in a sense. That doesn't
enable us to *necessarily* conclude that we should drop old
evaluations, just that there is a thread of entities assocaited with
that resource.

To ground it in a scenario... the thing that started this was of the
broken page that is fixed by an author and re-evaluated. If you put
both of the evaluations into a database, you want to test if the
representation of the resource has been fixed. You can do that by
using the threading of a resource as an assumption. There is nothing
in EARL that says you must make that assumption, it is a function of
the person controlling the database.

From what you have said in the meetings I am fairly confident that
your point is just that these rules cannot be compulsory for EARL; is
that correct? If so, I agree - it's obviously the domain of data
processing rather than data storage.

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://purl.org/net/swn#> .
:Sean :homepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .

Received on Sunday, 9 December 2001 17:49:20 UTC