Re: A simple question....

> 1)
>    <rdf:Description about="http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/~sde">
>        <s:Creator>Stefan Decker</s:Creator>
>      </rdf:Description>
>    </rdf:RDF>
> 2)
>    <rdf:Description about="http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/~sde">
>        <s:Creator resource="http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/~sde#myname"/>
>      </rdf:Description>
>    </rdf:RDF>

More than a question about Links,
I think this raises a question about the semantic relation between Literal and Resources.

As I understand RDF, there is a dichotomy between both,
then your examples are clearly different.
Though, it would be very interesting to do (2).

Some people on this thread talked about 'dereferencing',
but I don't quite agree with teir view :
I don't think we NEED to dereference, for example, an RDF file's URI to its RDF content :
RDF statements are about resources, and the resource IS the content, am I wrong ?

So your problem depends on the semantic behind that '#' symbol (fragment)
which, according to URI specifications, depends on the mime-type of the resource.
For RDF, clearly, it denotes a "virtual" resource,
  defined inside the "real" RDF file resource.
For HTML, since it is only used (curently) with <a name=...> syntax,
  it denotes a point in the file,
  but we could imagine to use it with <span name=...> as Ora Lassila suggests...
For JPEG or other binary format containing legacy meta-data,
  we could imagine using '#' notation to access them... Why not ?

The remaining (and not that easy !) problem is that,
as far as I know, when you request a #'ed URL to an http server,
it returns the whole resource, so it's YOUR job to extract the fragment.

But isn't it the philosophy of XML and RDF :
"may be I don't understand the whole stuff,
 but I still can do things with it"

Specialized application will handle certain kind of resources,
knowing things about their mime-types,
and how extracting fragment from them.

Hope this'll help

  Pierre-Antoine

Received on Friday, 19 November 1999 05:00:15 UTC