W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > April 2001


From: Lee Jonas <lee.jonas@cakehouse.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 16:25:07 +0100
Message-ID: <51ED29F31E20D411AAFD00105A4CD7A770F0@zingiber.cakehouse.co.uk>
To: "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <charles@w3.org>, Lee Jonas <lee.jonas@cakehouse.co.uk>
Cc: "'Aaron Swartz'" <aswartz@swartzfam.com>, RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Ok, so if I want to store some metadata that states you wrote the email this
is a response to, which URI would you suggest I use for the email and which
URI to identify you?

Is there any way I can determine the appropriate URIs to use


Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org] wrote:

>No, you are falling into the trap I am describing, of making assertions
>a URI that you did not publish and for which you appear to be unaware of
>As far as I am aware, mailto:charles@w3.org is a URI that W3C maintains,
>whether ot provides a way to get to me, or just a way to get a mesage
>that I have been sacked for eating all the vegemite.
>At any rate, the semantics of that URI are the responsibility of the
>publisher - in this case w3.org (and here we get to the real process
>- the people who give away ^H^H^H^H^H sell domain names do not yet seem
>convinced that they have any responsibility to the community that relies on
>domain names to identify something). If we have a body that assigns URNs
>we just repeat the problem, plus we have to resolve them and for some
>everyone seems to think that the best way of doing that is via a URI
Received on Thursday, 12 April 2001 11:25:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:29 UTC