- From: Sampo Syreeni <decoy@iki.fi>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:03:13 +0300 (EEST)
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sean B. Palmer wrote: >> In the case of documents defining namespaces, there might be >> more than one, each with their own RDF descriptions. [...] > >Once again, this is no problem, unless you somehow believe that what >you get back from a namespace upon dereferening it is the "one true >definition" of the terms in that namespace; utter nonsense. That is my problem, yes. I seem to think that URIs should only identify a single resource, as it's a lot more difficult to deal with URIs if they don't. Plus, it's not in accordance with the original definition of URIs. The URI-to-resource mapping is designed to be one-to-many, with a preference towards one-to-one. But I'll stop my pedantry now, before it gets ot of hand. ;) Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:decoy@iki.fi, gsm: +358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 05:03:17 UTC