- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 18:45:37 -0700
- To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- CC: "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
I'm still stuck on the lifetimes of URIs vs. lifetimes of statements, in engineering the semantic web: "... you might be able to make some plausible predictions or credible commitments.." Stuff goes away. Mean time between site failure might be less than 10 years. Companies change their names, merge, split, go out of business, stop doing the business that caused them to bring up the web site. Students graduate. Non-profit organizations change brands. Web technology itself is only 20 years old, 20 years from now. Sure, maybe some will still be around, but on the average, no one has the foundation or insurance policy to guarantee that a URI will still be around to respond "200-" to anything for the expected lifetime of the assertion being made. Many industries and applications have a requirement that the statements made and inferences about them need to last much longer than 20 years: government documents, descriptions of building plans, life insurance policies. Anyone who wants to make a "semantic web" statement which need to have meaning beyond the guaranteed lifetime of the web sites used to form their "ontology" cannot link the meaning of those statements to the future 200-response expectation of the referenced web site. The expected lifetime of any particular piece of web content is much less than the needed lifetime of the validity of semantics and understanding of semantic intent. I think it is more natural to assume that there are *no* stable URIs in the long run: every URI has a lifetime, we wish every one to have as long a life as possible, but every single URI will, at some point in the future, evaporate. Consider: at any instant, there are: * People who want to make semantic web assertions P * assertions that those people want to make A(p) for p in P * for each assertion, their desired lifetime (how long each person wants to make sure the assertion is interpretable) D(a) for a in A(p) for p in P * terms needed in those assertions T(a) for a in A(p) for p in P * URIs under the control of those people which are appropriate U(t) for t in T(a) for a in A(p) for p in P * expected lifetime of those URIs E(u) for u in U(t) for t in T(a) for a in A(p) for p in P. CLAIM: Most people don't have the ability to make assertions for which the URIs they use have an expected lifetime longer than the desired lifetime of all of the assertions they want to make. for large percentage of p in P there are some assertions a in A(p) such that for some needed term t in T(a), such that the desired lifetime of the asertion D(a) exceeds the maximum expected lifetime of all resources available to p. Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net
Received on Monday, 16 March 2009 01:46:23 UTC