- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 14:40:18 +0100
- To: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>, "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
- Cc: <Ora.Lassila@nokia.com>
> Perhaps Sean would be interested in a combined effort for a 'name' > URN scheme that would correspond to the hierarchical path syntax > defined by my HRN example along with an optional temporal field for > those applications which require names that are temporally as well > as globally unique. > > Eh? Fine by me. However, I don't really see people starting to take it up all that fast... for as long as URLs are around and people can use them in RDF, they will be used - you can't stop that from happening, and rightfully so. The RDF applications that I use work just fine with URLs, and yes, most of them I use strictly as "names" rather than retrievable resources. But they work for the kind of stuff I'm doing. There is the problem with referring to concepts cross-media, and for that I support stuff like the tag URI scheme, and/or the name URN if it ever gets off of the ground. But if you really want to get going, you'd better do it fast: URLs as namespaces is becoming a heavily established practice. Does this mean that the RDF, RDF Schema, DAML, Dublin Core, FOAF, DCTypes, EARL, Annotea and so on namespaces are broken? Hmm... and my signature; roughterms in an HTTP space? Yucky. -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> . :Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2001 09:48:25 UTC