- From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@swartzfam.com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 12:37:02 -0600
- To: Stefan Kokkelink <skokkeli@mathematik.uni-osnabrueck.de>, Lee Jonas <lee.jonas@cakehouse.co.uk>
- CC: RDF interest group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Stefan Kokkelink <skokkeli@mathematik.uni-osnabrueck.de> wrote: > Perhaps the serialization should provide an 'rdf:anonymous_ID' attribute in > addition to rdf:ID. rdf:ID specifies an URI, rdf:anonymous_ID a local > identifier that is allowed to be changed (more precisely: mapped one to one) > by an RDF application (e.g. parser) processing the data. And this identifier > should not be interpreted as a URI, it's private data! This brings us to a problem that I believe Graham Klyne rasied: Is there a need for anonymous resources? Outside of interpreting the spec, in an ideal world, do you need to have anonymous resources? Could the functionality be replaced by giving everything a URI and simply using RDF properties to provide the information you get from anonymity? What benefit do you get from anonymous resources? -- [ Aaron Swartz | me@aaronsw.com | http://www.aaronsw.com ]
Received on Thursday, 8 March 2001 13:36:52 UTC