- From: Lee Jonas <lee.jonas@cakehouse.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 17:09:42 -0000
- To: "'Stefan Kokkelink'" <skokkeli@mathematik.uni-osnabrueck.de>, Lee Jonas <lee.jonas@cakehouse.co.uk>
- Cc: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@swartzfam.com>, RDF interest group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
I see - effectively an ID at the XML syntax level (allowing serialisation of graphs within a document) and not at the RDF model level (i.e. not an RDF resource identifier). Ok. Regards Lee -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Kokkelink [mailto:skokkeli@mathematik.uni-osnabrueck.de] Sent: 08 March 2001 16:05 To: Lee Jonas Cc: Aaron Swartz; RDF interest group Subject: Re: Again: Anonymous Resources Lee Jonas wrote: ... > What would the rdf:anonymous_ID actually accomplish over rdf:ID? If you > give a name to something it is no longer nameless. The interpretation is different. An RDF parser should be allowed to *change* the name by a one to one mapping in the first case. Of course it should not be allowed to do this with URI's given by rdf:IDs. For example the following 'RDF' would be equivalent <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="MyClass"> <dc:creator> <rdf:Description rdf:anonymous_ID="1"> <name>Stefan</name> </rdf:Description> </dc:creator> </rdfs:Class> <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="MyClass"> <dc:creator> <rdf:Description rdf:anonymous_ID="2"> <name>Stefan</name> </rdf:Description> </dc:creator> </rdfs:Class> since there is an obvious bijection ;-). Greetings, Stefan
Received on Thursday, 8 March 2001 12:10:06 UTC