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

Authors describing what their URIs mean

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 09:00:00 -0700
Message-ID: <005001c0c4fb$f7c21120$b17ba8c0@c1457248a.sttls1.wa.home.com>
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>, "RDF Logic" <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
From: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>

> Right. And the best way to do that is for the creator of the URI to say
> the URI means, not for a third party to guess and then assume that their
> guess is correct. (Until we get the telepathic web).

Right!!  And where the URI is a URL to a web page, the best way to do that
is simply to embed the RDF description of exactly what the author intended
the URI to denote right there between <head> ...</head>.

The strange thing, that I can't figure out, is: even though the W3C
recommends this (see quote form M&S below ),  one can almost never find such
descriptions on their pages.


Of course, we also need a good schema that would deconfuse these use\mention
terms like "denote", "name", "reference", "describes", "models", "sinn",
"bedeutung"  .....


Quoting:  http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/#transport

"Descriptions may be associated with the resource they describe in one of
four ways:

1.  The Description may be contained within the resource ("embedded"; e.g.
in HTML).
2.  The Description may be external to the resource but supplied by the
transfer mechanism in the same   retrieval transaction as that which returns
the resource ("along-with"; e.g. with HTTP GET or HEAD). "

...[snip passages that don't apply] ...

"The recommended technique for embedding RDF expressions in an HTML document
is simply to insert the RDF in-line as shown in Example 7.7. "

Example 7.7:

    <rdf:Description about="">
 <rdf:Seq ID="CreatorsAlphabeticalBySurname"
   rdf:_1="Mary Andrew"
   rdf:_2="Jacky Crystal"/>
<P>This is a fine document.</P>
Received on Saturday, 14 April 2001 12:03:26 UTC

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