- From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
- Date: 15 Jun 2001 16:30:28 +0200
- To: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
- Cc: Sean "B." Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
To follow what I just sent... I'm quite sure, by the way, that in some given applications, URIs will be "misused", i.e. used to identify other things that the one resource they theoreticaly identify; and the context will allow agents to handle that. But the theoretical ground must be solid; some application will need it (e-commerce being the most evident). Build context-driven applications on strict foundations is easier than building strict application on a swamp ;-) IMHO Pierre-Antoine On 15 Jun 2001 16:21:30 +0200, Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN wrote: > On 15 Jun 2001 14:46:32 +0100, Sean B. Palmer wrote: > > The question here is about trust and authority. If I say that I only > > trust a piece of RDF using your homepage as a URI in it somewhere if > > and only if it is digitally signed by a digital signature that I know > > is from you, then I can be "sure" that the context of its use will be > > the one that is "correct" to you. > > Sean, > > I think we are not talking about the same problem. > *My* question is not, IMHO, about trust and authority; > I'm not concerned about what a SW agent will *believe* a URI identifies, > I'm concerned about what the URI *does* identify truly. > I'm not discussing about implementation, > I'm discussing about theory. > > Of course, implementation problems are a bunch, and must indeed be > addressed. > But I do not think we all agree on the theory (which URI identifies > what), > and I think we should reach agreement, > or how could the SW agent we develop agree with each other ? > > Pierre-Antoine
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 10:29:15 UTC