RE: about, rdf:ID and anonymous resources

> I still have some problem with that ID thing.

Me too.  I guess this another one for the issues list if
its not there already.

I didn't pick up anything explicit in trawl through the
archives, though I'm sure there has been previous
discussion.  The closest thing is the "what does identify".

I'll add it to my working list of issues and pointers.


> What exactly is the point of writing, in a file foo.rdf
>  <rdf:Description ID="bar">
> As I understand it, it "defines" the resource
>  foo.rdf#rdf
> So, why not simply write
>  <rdf:Description about="#bar">
> Again, as I understand it, this is because the fragment 
> id "bar" does not exist in the file foo.rdf,
> so rdf:ID allows to define AND describe it.
> Well, the fragment id "bar" does not exist in foo.rdf. So 
> what ? Most of the time, rdf:ID is used (as far as I know) 
> for classes or properties: resources that are abstract by 
> essence, that can not be retrieved anyway ! Naming them 
> foo.rdf#bar or whatever is nothing but a convention.
> Defining a fragment id allows the URI of the resource to 
> return the description of the resource ; but the 
> description is a PROPERTY of the resource, not the resource 
> itself. The metaporperty rdfs:isDefinedBy is intended for 
> that, and XPointer allows to point to any rdf;Description 
> tag in a more standard way.
>  T(rdfs:isDefinedBy, my_resource, foo.rdf#xpointer(...))
> So, did I miss something about rdf:ID ?
>  Pierre-Antoine
> ______________________________________________________
> Bote aux lettres - Caramail -

Received on Wednesday, 4 October 2000 09:56:40 UTC