- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:51:59 -0000
- To: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>, "Al Gilman" <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Cc: <duerst@w3.org>, <w3t-qa@w3.org>
> To collect or compare evaluation results, you need a more > precise identification [Note 1] of what was evaluated than > a URI-reference provides, in all but rare cases. I agree that this has been the case up until very recently, but I no longer believe this to be a problem (although it is still a situation that merits some comment). There is some misunderstanding here about URIs: although they can be used to describe anything, people have been worried about using different opaque strings to identify the same resource. This is not a problem because of the SW concept of equivalence as defined in the DAML+OIL ontology, and many others I expect. There is a keyword in Notation3 for this, in fact. People will soon start using URIs for processing. This has already been achieved with software such as CWM, but for the most part this is "demo-ware" and not pragmatically inclined. However, although using URIs for software identifiers may seem counter-intuitive at first, I believe that the Webizing of applications will provide more scope for application evolution that the initial constraints have suggested. -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> . :Sean :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Monday, 19 March 2001 11:51:48 UTC