- From: Didier PH Martin <martind@netfolder.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:09:32 -0500
- To: "Dan Brickley" <Daniel.Brickley@bristol.ac.uk>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Hi Dan, Dan said: On the RDF/WebDAV front, this new draft is interesting as it relates to some of the issues we've discussed w.r.t. 'anonymous' nodes and the relationship between resource identifiers (URIs) and the resources themselves. I'd really like to see this nailed down explicitly for RDF: is RDF happy with the notion that one single resource can have multiple URI names bound to it? Didier reply: Often by URI we mean in fact URL. A URN can points to several URLs and therefore if an object is refered by a URN then it potentially refers to several URLs. When we refer to an object by a URN we refer to its name not its location. Its name (URN) can then be translated (with the proper DNS record) into several locations (URL). This said, are you proposing that because URNs are not very popular (even if they can actually be resolved with the right DNS query) and that, in fact, people seems to stick to URLs. Thus maybe we then speak simply of URLs instead of URIs. Cheers Didier PH Martin ---------------------------------------------- Email: martind@netfolder.com Conferences: Web New York (http://www.mfweb.com) Book to come soon: XML Pro published by Wrox Press Products: http://www.netfolder.com
Received on Thursday, 23 December 1999 13:09:48 UTC